RE Himalayan vs 250cc Dual Sport - need your opinions!
 

Afternoon folks!

As a Expat from the old country living in USA I'm looking into a small bike for my next ride and I've been very interested in Royal Enfields Himalayan. However in the same(ish) budget price range are the Japanese Dual Sports like the CRF 250, KLX 250.

I'd love to hear any feedback of people who either have both bikes or have ridden both bikes and their thoughts as a comparison - what are their real life strengths and weaknesses? Any confounding issues?

Thanks for the input!

Hi,
Thought you might like an opinion and that is all this is, have had a number of smaller bikes over the years none overly modern, ie xr's xt's and ridden other peoples bikes KLX250. Most recent was a Super Sherpa set up for touring and put a few K's on that. I have to say it was the smoothest 250 I have ever ridden could sit on 100km/hr + with no problems. The thing is it still felt like a small bike and could get to be hard work and tiring over a length of time. My best effort was a 4500km ride in 10 days on a 1974 XL 175, they were a very long 10 days. I now ride a Triumph Scrambler have so for past 13years great but a bit heavy. Took a Himalayan for a test ride ~11/2Hrs over varied terrain, went there expecting to be disappointed, having ridden other Enfields. But was very impressed was smooth with adequate power and very easy to ride had a pillion for part of it which made little difference, so can carry a load. Main point is it felt like a bigger bike which it is but extremely manageable and comfortable. My impression is that if contemplating a long ride which may be daunting on a small bike, would be much easier on a Hima. But would depend on the type of riding you intend doing, reliability I can't speak of but the reports on the forums seem good.
Joe

I own a Honda Crf250L and earlier on I have had a weeks ride on Kawasaki Klx250 up in northern Thailand. I have also had a (very) short go on the Himalayan. I did have very positive expectations to the Himalayan as I for example have done longer trips in both Nepal and India and Bhutan on Royal Enfield Bullets and loved it! And in general I have come to like smaller and more lightweight bikes with lower power.

Specifications wise - they all have more or less the same amount of power, the Yammie Wr250R has 31 HP and are by that a bit ahead of the others. The Himalayan has a bit more tourqe as one can expect.
Weight - the Himalayan is around 180 kilograms dry, the japanese 250s are around 130-140 kilos dry. The Honda Crf250 Rally some kilos more. And thats 40-50 kilos lighter than the Himalayan! And knowing how much weight means when youre into the rough stuff the japanese 250s have a huuuuge advantage over the Himalayan weightwise. That said the Himalayan has a low center of gravity and it didnt feel that heavy as the number say when I had a go on it.

Fuel capacity - the 250s comes with gas tanks of 7-8 liters (the Rally has 10,1) and the Himalayan has a 15 liter gas tank. And thats a huge advantage for the Himalayan. The 7-8 liter gas tank on the 250s means their range is 200 kms, maybe a tad more while the Himalayan easily can do 400 kms if you dont twist the throttle all the way. That means if your going for a bit of a distance you will need more fuel capacity on the 250s. And that means bigger gas tanks - which again are quite expensive. You can carry extra fuel in jerrycans, bottles, fuelbladders etc - but imo its all a real PITA out in the real life. A big gas tank is what you need!
The Himalayan also comes with more equipment than the 250s, windscreen, bashplate, and engine bars for protection etc. They also have an option with alu panniers for a bit more bucks.
A Himalayan will also be better for carrying stuff as it is bigger and more sturdy in the first place.

So if you want to set up your bike for a bit of distance riding the Himalayan will be the better out of the box bike. The 250s will need a fair bit of upgrades that easily can be a bit costly.

Reliabilitywise - I think the japanese 250s are still quite far ahead of the Himalayan. They have been around so much longer and by that they much more refined. The first Himalayan model the carburated BS3 got quite harsh reviews. The second edition the EFI BS4 seems to be a bit better. Its not been out that long so that so theres not many users who have done some tens of thousands of kms on them. The most serious problem I have noticed is that the top end have started leaking on at least two occasions, the bolts and the thread to keep the top end at good tourqe to the cylinder seems to be underdimensioned. Its just what I have read, but there has been at least two faults with this. The dutch woman who bought her Himalayan in India aka Itchy Boots (on Youtube) burned her clutch on her bike at quite low milage 10-15 k kms or so? And thats not a good sign.

I have been thinking of upgrading my 250 Honda to a Himalayan but I have come to that conclusion it will not be much of an upgrading. Its so much heavier, it doesnt have more power (a bit more tourqe though) its not as reliable as the Honda, and I have already bought a bigger gas tank to it (if I only had time to mount it...) and if I win the lottery I would consider to upgrade the suspension too on the Honda.

If the Himalayan had 30-35 HP, the weight was 20-30 kilos less and long distance reliability was proven good I would definetively had gone for a Himalayan. But as things are today Im still in for my 250 over the Himalayan.

Here is a Himalayan versus a Honda Crf250 Rally comparison:

https://youtu.be/-i8dYM3MQds

Thank you for your posts gentlemen I appreciate it - I will check out Itchy Boots on youtube

Him
 

I've owned the KLX and the CRF in the US – IMO the reintroduced efi KLX is the one to go for if you like good suspension out of the crate.

Own a Him now too: same power / speed, but more torque makes it a much nicer ride (had a WR-R too - least good for my sort of riding). Him is less of a DS but has managed same terrain I did on the 250s.
As mentioned: lower saddle, bigger tank, racks, screen and baseplate all add up.
Yes it's a 190 kilos but that includes a solid subframe - my Honda sub bent sideways after a light fall.

But I'd say it's important to try a Him first.
It's not like anything else. Some get it, some don't.
The 250s will be as you expect.

Best of all would be if Honda had made a Himalayan not a CRF450L.
Then we could all pack up and go home ;-)


PS: I'm pretty sure the Dutch woman's clutch failed on her first (BS3?) Him ages ago. Her current one (BS4) has probably passed that mileage and is running fine in Central Asia, afaict.
For a while she was lugging round a spare clutch and other spares, but has since ditched it.

Nah - the clutch failed in Iran on her current bike. You can have a look on her videos on Youtube. She had to get the bike on the back of a pickuptruck onto the next town and get it fixed there.
Clutch fail at 12-15 k kms can of course be accidental, but its not a good sign me thinks.
Anyhow - her vids are amazing and its huge fun to follow her on YT, both for the riding, scenery and the «Himalayan experience»

Quick update, after trying out a few bikes in this class went for the Himalayan. Frankly for the extra torque, plodability on and off road (with a 200+ mile fuel range) it suits me damn well. For the $4,700 new - what else can you buy here in the US that has the same stock? Although I did very nearly get persuaded into a KLX 250 - for a DS it would be my pick.

Keep on Riding!

I have owned a Himalayan for about 3 months now and ridden about 6,000 miles since I got it with no issues. It is a good all round, solid, go anywhere, do anything bike for a good price. Big bonus is if anything does break it is both easy and cheap to fix. As for the clutch going after 10 - 15 k, my bike now has 8,000 miles (12,000 km) and I have not even had to adjust it, I suppose it's down to how you ride it.

So your bike is basically just run in then...
Great that you havent had any problems with and that you «not even had to adjust it» whatever the things is that you havent had to adjust.
It would however be more interesting if somebody had done some real overlanding kms on a Himalayan, lets say 50 or 100 k kms and then could share their experiences about the bike...

Hi Snakeboy.

Yes, it's just run in. I have had to adjust the chain a couple of times because it is the OEM job and is stretching like freshly cooked spaghetti but nothing else.

Well, that's my plan, use my bike on an RTW over the next 5 or so years without major modifications and see how it stands up to it. I am currently off the road in Poland till Winter passes and then I shall resume my travels.

That sounds like a good plan. Best of luck with your long trip and please keep us updated with your experiences with the Himalayan as you get some distance on it...

Hi folks,

I am resuscitating this thread as I'm curious to hear how everyone is getting on with their small(er) bikes. I own a Himalayan, it's my second bike (first one with more than 125cc) and I haven't reached 3.000 km on it yet. Generally I like it, I bought it after riding one for about a week in Northern India and loved it. However now that I am back in Spain (Malaga), I am considering switching to a CRF250l.

The main reasons are
- there's plenty of little tracks around here which I think I'd be more comfortable riding on a lighter bike
- I would love to do longer distance trips e.g. to Morocco but for the foreseeable future I don't see that happening given the situation with covid, so I'm not sure I need the bigger tank for now
- I hear that the CRF250l can comfortably sit at 100/110km/h, whilst my experience with the Hima is that it can cruise at 80/90 km/h, beyond that it vibrates and feels uncomfortable (not sure if that's because it is not run in yet?). I know neither bike is designed for highway speed but I use my bike for commuting and unfortunately there is a stretch of highway that I can't avoid.

I'd love to hear what people think about this, particularly if there is anyone with experience with both bikes. Thanks!

Andrea

yeah Im not too worried about reliability tbh, it is true that the Hima BS4 hasnt been out for as long as the crf but so far owners seem happy with it. My question was more about 1) whether the weight difference between the two bikes is noticeable or not 2) whether cruising at 100/110 km/h with the CRF is a realistic expectation or pure fantasy :)

Personally I like to keep my Crf between 90-95 km/h on the speedo riding on highways. And that is 7-8 % less in real speed as the speedo is 7-8 % optimistic on the Crfs. I know other Crf owners ride it harder and faster than I do and thus 100-110 km/h is readily possible. But personally I think that speed gets too much rpms and stress on the engine. Fuel consumption rises and probably engine wear too. I once rode a 800 km highway ride (in Thailand) on my Crf. The last 400 or so kms I rode fast! I was cruising at 100-110, even 120 km/h sometimes. And that day the Crf engine burned quite a bit of oil too. I had to top up a good bit of engine oil the next day. And thats the only time my Crf have burned any noticeable amount of oil. It hasnt happend before or after. So clearly the Crf didnt like such cruising speeds. I will add that it was a freakin hot day too with more than 40 degrees Celcius max tempratur and that could have played a part in the oil burning too.
I have 40 k kms on my Crf btw.

To get from a Himalayan to a Crf250 to get higher cruising speed - nah sorry mate. Thats not the right move me thinks.

That was never confirmed. She said in episode 63 series 1 that she thought the handlebar risers might play a part to the fact that the clutch wore out prematurely and just in case that was the problem she had the handlebar risers removed. Thus - nothing confirmed about the reason why the clutch wore out

I owned both bikes a few years apart (full reviews on my www).
Amazingly the weight of the Him is hardly noticeable and it sure is nicer to plod on the trails.

I think the only reason you think you can cruise faster on the L is that it feels less harsh. Or it's a Honda so it can hack it.
I did not find the L could comfortably sit at 100/110km/h
At times it was down to 75 up hills, into wind at altitude.

I haven't tried the CRF yet, but I did read something about being able to cruise at 100km/h with it so I was curious to hear a few more opinions - so thank you both for your comments :)

I read both your reviews Chris - the one about the Hima was partly why eventually I decided to buy one in fact! And I still like it, I am just wondering if I am starting to outgrow it, and whether it'd make sense to get something a bit more off-road oriented like the CRF to have more fun that way. Or, to approach this the other way and go for a CB500x which I guess could be more fun than the Hima as a daily commuter. I guess part of it is that the Hima is the first bike I've ever owned (well after my beloved suzuki van van) and I am curious to try other things. The soul-searching continues!

Him would be a great first proper bike.
The problem is there is nothing much like it out there.
You definitely want to try the other two first.
CRF might give the impression of being easier to handle, being lighter. but is taller (depends on your leg length) and the tank is annoyingly small which is just as well as so is the seat.
On either bike there was nothing I managed off-road (not that extreme) that the other could not also do.

The CBX (I've also owned) is amazingly almost the same mpg + faster and smoother. It's all the bike you need. Loads around now and great value for money last time I looked.
Can do the same off-road but a bit more effort and down to tyres and 19-er front.

Lotta great bikes out there ;-)

You can't cruise comfortably with 110km/h on a CRF. So it won't help your cruising speed to change to a CRF. However, if you go to remoter areas, it already can be hard to get spare parts for a CRF250 and you would never get any parts for a Himalayan for sure.

Hi All,

For me the Hima's cruising sweet spot is about 80 kmph - anything over that the engine feels too strained and hands go numb after a few hours at this speed. It can do Highway technically but you have nothing left in the tank to help get out of trouble - though a CRF would be the same.

Any rough roads/tracks I've ridden the last year the Himalayan did very well, enough grunt to chug along or mountain goat up rocky hills. For any of the easier off-road single/twin track it was a perfect bike for me - technical track I'd want a lighter DS.

The Himalayan would serve you well across the farmer tracks in Spain or the rough roads in Chris's parts of Morocco for travel riding with a bit of off-road. However if you are planning on long drags across fast tarmac I would strongly consider the CBX500 if it's in the budget.

I got the Himalayan instead as it was about $2,000 USD cheaper new and it will do just as well as the CBX off-road but not as well or comfortable on the roads.

However the CBX500 would not make me feel like Indiana Jones about to ride along desert tracks to a forbidden jungle temple every time I sit in the saddle and ride to the grocery store. That emotional feeling makes this bike my favourite in all the ones I've had!

There is something in what you say - with the Himalayan there is an element of cocking a snook at conventional thinking but without the need to wear a hairshirt - the Himalayan certainly brought a smile to my lips. What you say about the effective 80kmh speed limit and vibrations was certainly true for the one I rode but that was a very young bike that was nowhere near run in - Chris Scott reckons that the vibration eases as it runs in - the benefit of that is that you get to travel the world more slowly and actually see it.

At the end of the day for me it was a tossup between the Himalayan and the Moto Guzzi V85 that the V85 won - I know, very different bikes - but I am not ruling out getting a Himalayan at a later date.

There's a lot to be said about buying a motorcycle for what & how you are actually go to ride it vs what you desire.

I have been trying to talk myself out of buying a new Honda Trail 125cc since it's confirmed it's coming to the US. I have absolutely no reason to buy one, but man do I want to strap my camping backpack on the sheeprack and go find some trails to explore!

If you ever get back to Blighty, Nathan Milward is gathering together a group of low H.P adventure bikes (CRF, Himmy etc...) so that people can have a day out, trying the different bikes on different terrain.
An excellent idea I think.

I've been keeping up with Nathan's video's on his new set up - love the idea. If I had the option a year ago to actually test all of the bikes out before purchasing including the 390 ADV it would have been a dream (he just needs a VX 300).

I would have flown back to do it as trying to find and organise test rides on all of them would be a PITA indeed. Glad he is finding a niche to carve out in the ADV world in the UK, that and his Postie Bike tours!

Himalayan Update
 

This is a quick update on my experience with my Himalayan.

The bike has now done 25,000 miles (40,000 km) and the only issues that I have to report on are as follows.

It developed a small oil leak from the rocker cover at 12,000 miles but removing the old gasket sealant and replacing it solved that. The drive chain gave up the ghost at about 16,000 miles, it did not snap but it was developing numerous tight spots. I replaced it with a DID 525 on the original 520 sprockets and so far no adjustment has been required.

Oh and despite taking it off road and dropping it a couple of times on the dirt it sustained no major damage, just the usual cracked indicator stems. A bit of black insulating tape sorted those out. Other than that no problems.

Nothing has fallen off, it has never failed to start, and apart from a vacuum chain oilier it is bog standard.

Still not had to adjust the clutch.

Keep the updates coming please.
bier

I understand this is an old post, but for "future reference", Noraly (aka Itchy Boots) explained in her 10,000km review of the bike that burning the clutch was actually her fault (if I remember well she burned it when trying to get out of the rut or something).
Other than that, I'm with you about everything else. :)

I recall that the clutch cable had been installed incorrectly (or moved for some reason) and this added to the issue.

Had a chat with a guy at the ABR festival (UK) who has an off road school and he said that the clutches were a weak point.
However he also said that the bikes were put through tough, duel sport/enduro type terrain which he knows they’re not designed for. He really rated the bikes and said that they gave more confidence to off road novices than CRF250s due to their low Center of gravity and tracktability.

Agree with the confidence part. My wife rode the Himalayan and the low seat height was great. The Vstrom250 she bought is a little higher.

Honestly I dont think there is any comparison. The Himalayan is more comparable to a 1982 Honda XL250. They are overweight underpowered and poorly built. Broken frames, crappy wheels, shitty brakes. I'd definitely say hard pass. The only caveat would be is if I was buying a bike in India to ride in India/Nepal only.

RE Himalayan vs 250cc Dual Sport - need your opinions!
 

Reports of broken frames are both historic and widely exaggerated, and to a degree Ill-informed. Remember the BMW GS forks that broke and killed a British bike journalist ? Massive recall issued and hardly mentioned now.

Have a look at this. Then decide.

https://youtu.be/fPaj10lHep4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nathanthepostman youtube channel (Nathan rode from Australia to England on a Honda CT110 «postie bike») now has a fleet of different small-ish dual sport/travel bikes/adv bikes, amongst them several Himalayans, Honda Crf250 Rally and a Crf300Rally, BMW 310 GS, KTM 390 ADV, Honda CB500X, Honda CT125 Hunter Cub and of course the old postie bike CT110 and maybe a few others that I dont remember. If you want opinions on the different small-ish travel bikes - Nathans channel can be worth checking out…

Exaggerated? I saw a large number of broken Himalayans. The guided groups in Ladakh I would see broken down almost everyday. They are cheap for a reason. IMHO there is no comparison with the Japanese bikes mentioned. Each to their own though. They are easy to ride, easy to repair especially in India and quite cheap to do so, but overweight, underpowered and lacking in build quality.

How old were the Himalayans? Had they got many miles on them and how had they been treated in the time? Sure, they are cheaper than the Japanese equivalents and the quality may not be as good - but is the quality good enough on the new machines? Having something that never breaks down because it has been so over engineered is, generally, a waste of money - and with the Himalayan you get a lot of bike, with a standard of quality that is good enough for not a lot of money.

As regards the underpowered bit when do you need 80+HP? They are less than 200kg wet and the weight is carried low down, the gearbox is designed with the power output in mind. When I tested one it was very new and the engine felt a bit buzzy on UK dual carriageways but once on the single cariage country roads the engine / gearbox / chassis combination was great fun - they were designed as a system and they work well as a system.

It seems to me that this is the sort of argument where the two of you will have to agree to disagree. Hound_Dog has made it very clear he isn't interested in the Himalayan, and I doubt that there's anything you could say that would convince him otherwise.

I think you are right.

Royal Enfields are cheap for a reason. Like everything, they are built to a price point.

You are either happy with the product produced at that price point, or you are not.

There is no correct answer.

For example. I just replaced my 6” orbital sander with a Festool one.
$1190 AUD (~$890 USD).

Crazy money but the rolls Royce of sanders. In contrast, I bought a cheap shop vac for $90 as it will do the job good enough instead of $1000 Festool one.

Buy what you want and :mchappy: beer