COMPARISON
Honda TLR 200/250
The Honda TLRs are often the most ‘pimped out’ ride in the paddock – owners lovingly upgrade their machines and revel in the muted sound of a four-stroke exhaust; music to their ears at any cost. What is the difference between the two models other than 50 cubic centimetres? Read on to find out that there’s more than you think!
Words: Matt Heppleston • Pictures: Aender Brepsom
In the early 1970s, we witnessed the big four Japanese manufacturers — Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki and Yamaha — getting into the trials market. Honda, being the largest, engaged with Sammy Miller. Together they introduced the humble TL125; light, gentle and incredibly reliable. It was never a great machine, but if you wanted a four-stroke, your options were very limited. Later came the TL250. It was a proper trials model that evolved into the factory 305 machine. Still, like all the very successful machines to follow, most notably with Rob Shepherd and Eddie Lejeune,
they were never sold commercially. Honda continued to supply the customer market with derivatives of the TL125, either as the Seeley-framed 200 or the more home-market RS 200, 220 or 250.
However, the trials world changed overnight with the arrival of the Yamaha TY250 monoshock in 1983. All the other manufacturers saw the light, and by 1986, they had all gone ‘mono’ as well. In 1985, Honda introduced the RTL250, which was hailed at the time as being as close to perfection as possible. Lejeune and Steve Saunders’s factory Rothmans team got something even more special, but that is
another story.
The RTL250 was a very limited-edition machine; for example, the UK got 10 per year. As the price was astronomical compared to everything else, they were intended to be given to dealer-sponsored experts or those with very deep pockets. Strangely, Honda was also producing the TLM two-stroke mono-shock range in capacities gradually increasing from 200, 220, 240, 250 and then to the final 260 version. These were actually pretty decent machines but, again, with limited imports to the main markets of Europe. They sold in large numbers in Japan and Asia.
TWIN-SHOCK TLR
The TLR200 and 250 were introduced for the 1984 season. They were still based on the humble TL125 four-stroke engine that had grown into the trail orientated 200 version, and the 250 for competition. Despite their relatively late arrival, they were still fitted with twin-shocks, and they seemed to be squarely aimed at the clubman market for those who still wanted a four-stroke. To my mind, Honda had the most extensive and most confusing trials model range possible! In today’s classic trials world, the TLRs are possibly the most modified and ‘flashy’ ride in the paddock. The level of investment and modifications could only be undertaken by the most committed of owners. I own a 200 version, which I rode for a couple of years a while ago without developing any emotional attachment in any way shape or form! I am much happier with my Yamaha TY175, thank you very much. Happily, I had the opportunity to test a 200 and 250 back-to-back. Both had been modified in very similar ways, whilst retaining most of the factory differences. The machines themselves have been assembled from some of the best upgrades available on the market and are a real credit to their owner.
DETAILED DIFFERENCES
Let us look a little more deeply at how the two models differ. On the surface, there is the obvious capacity increase and a smaller fuel tank on the 250. However, the changes are much more fundamental than that. To better understand the differences, we need to dig deep into the very comprehensive Honda factory service and repair manual.
CHASSIS
One of the most significant changes everyone seems to make to the 200 is the headstock angle and footrest position. The manual gives, for the 200, a caster angle of 26°30 and a trail of 86mm, whereas the 250 has a caster angle of 24°30 and a trail of 78mm, so already we find a substantial difference between the two.
The headstock is standard on both test machines, but the footrests have been lowered into identical positions. The only other major chassis difference is the fitting of the exquisite AJG Engineering aluminium swingarm to the 200 version. It is 20mm longer than standard and weighs almost 2,000g less than the standard steel version fitted to the 250.
To create a more modern, upright riding position, both Hondas have billet top yokes.
Handlebars are, of course, Renthal with a sixinch rise, and S3 Trifix grips are used.
On the suspension front, both have an identical setup that has been substantially upgraded from standard. The Hybrid Fork Suspension PRO has been grafted into the 35mm Ǿ front forks. The PRO kit is an upgrade to the tuning and control of the standard hydraulic system, which uses an air cartridge and a new spring tuned to the individual rider’s weight. The cartridge pressure is set using a hand pump; it basically depends on rider weight and riding preferences. These are all defined in the installation manual.
The very well-known and respected Rockshocks [www.rockshocks.co.uk] are fitted on the rear, and again the units are supplied custom-built to the machine and owner’s weight. Brakes on both machines were the
TLR250 hubs, stainless spokes and Excel rims. Topping off the chassis is the Gollner Honda style tank-seat units with a three-litre alloy fuel container.
ENGINE
Things are much closer to standard in the engine department, with the motor and airfilter box being standard Honda and a new Cotton carburettor fitted to replace the worn standard unit. In the photos, the 200 engine is silver and the 250 black. Looking carefully, you can see the larger external fining on the 250 barrel as these engines do tend to run quite hot. A ‘top tip’ is to use a very high-quality motorcycle-specific engine oil such as Putoline Ester Tech 4+ or Rock Oil Synthesis XRP and change it often.
The manual shows that the six-speed gearboxes and primary drive fitted are completely different – the 250 has a gearbox developed for trials, with the first three ratios much closer together than the 200, the primary reduction between the engine and clutch basket being much lower as well. A minor variation from standard is the respective gearing of 10 x 48 on the 200 and 9 x 44 on the 250, which is as close to identical as to make no difference.
Different exhaust systems are fitted with the S3 titanium front pipe [www.S3parts. com available in the UK from www. trialendurodirect.com]. The 200 has a DEP system fitted, whereas the 250 has the fabulouslooking Mitani silencer. They both function as you would expect and keep the noise down whilst also letting the engine rev as it should, to deliver that ‘music to your ears’ four-stroke symphony.
TESTING
The test area was super-dry, baked earth which had not seen rain for many a month. It was covered in a very fine coating of dust and small stones which meant throttle control was at a premium. First, I jumped aboard the 200cc version, as this is the baseline model and the most popular — and possibly the most available on the market. Everything came perfectly to hand and was very modern in its feel. All the controls worked smoothly and, I have to say, I started to revel in the suspension’s performance.
The front forks are plush with a soft action for the first part of the travel, which had a noticeable progressive control right to the end of full deflection, and this is mirrored by the superb Rockshocks that also felt very plush and confidence-inspiring. These comments apply equally to the 250 model. I am seriously thinking of upgrading the forks on some of my machines, as I thought the improvement was very noticeable. On transitions between downhill turns into a tight uphill this smoothness had major benefits in weight distribution.
FOUR-STROKE
The four-stroke engine is very smooth as well; it plods along with just a whiff of the throttle. In these situations, I didn’t need to resort to the clutch at all. When needed, this example was smooth in its engagement, which is not always the case; both machines are fitted with Barnett Kevlar clutch plates. Honda will also sell you an anti-judder kit for the standard clutch plates.
Keeping a relatively high tick-over also helps me, as it mitigates the dreaded four-stroke cough that has ruined many a ride. In terms of the TLR200 power and what I was riding there was more than enough; a good blip of the throttle had me up everything easily. These machines come into their own in very muddy conditions where grip is at a premium, as I know from my previous experience.
One thing that anyone coming from a twostroke will notice is the extreme engine braking. At the top of a step you need to keep a little throttle opening and not snap it shut like on a two-stroke otherwise you may just come up short. Second gear was a noticeable difference from first and is the highest I would want to ride in a ‘nadgery’ section. Third is just too high for me unless it is flat out in bottomless mud or on a big climb where the risk is the motor runs out of steam.
REVELATION
The TLR250, however, was a revelation. The extra capacity gives a small but noticeable increase in power, which is delivered slightly lower down the rev range; the longer stroke will help with the increased torque. The power output is given as 15PS @ 6,000rpm for the 250 as opposed to 13.4PS @ 6,500rpm for the 200. It did translate into increased confidence on bigger climbs; however, the biggest shock was that I could use three gears in sections. I was amazed how useable third gear was; I could potter along the bottom of a climb and then smoothly accelerate to flat out where I even managed a little jump for joy when clearing the lip of a short sharp climb! Was there anything I didn’t like too much? The answer is the brakes.
My own Honda has a bigger Reflex model front hub, combined with a shorter heavyduty brake cable and a longer CR model rear brake arm. To me, they are much sharper and more confidence-inspiring. The TLR250 hubs fitted to both models work well; it is just that they do not stop you dead in your tracks. It is more of a steady retardation, especially in the rear, which I am sure would benefit from a longer brake arm, perhaps one last thing to develop for the aftermarket boys ha-ha.
FINAL QUESTION
The final question will be ‘does the head angle make much of a difference?’. Indeed, the 250 has sweeter steering, being more precise on turns; however, the 200 is in all honesty not that bad. Yes, you need more force to get the machine to turn, but riding up rocky stream beds where it holds its line superbly, or off big drops where there is no fear of tucking under is a worthwhile consideration. For the record, I never had my machine modified, only changing the footrest position.
So, there you have it, two apparently identical machines that ride very differently, given that there are only small external differences between the two models.
At the end of the test, the owner asked me which one I wanted to buy, and I did not hesitate in choosing the TLR250. The engine is a revelation. The combination of increased power and torque, combined with a gearbox with proper trials ratios and a sweet-steering chassis raises it above its smaller stablemate. In all honesty, there is nothing particularly wrong with the 200. For me, the 250 is just a much better trials motorcycle.