Which TZR are you interested in?
The 3MA looks great, no denying that, but the motor may as well
have been made out of chocolate, the 3XV however is a much better
bike.
The 3XV R spec' bike is way too heavily restricted, and can't be
delimited unless the barrels are ported too. The SP is the only way
to go but still needs an awful lot of money thrown at it to get the
performance, but well tuned can yield some serious HP. Lots of TZ
parts are interchangeable with the TZR's which is good for racing
but bad for the wallet. The 3XV in particular is very difficult to
derestrict; you cannot simply plug an M-Max into it!
Back to the 3MA's, again stick to the SP, and make sure you only
consider a Mk2 as they had revised carbs and lubrication system.
The best thing for the 3MA in my opinion is an RG500 or NS400/500
motor transplant... the chassis is begging for it!!
Either of these TZR's or an NSR will be pretty exclusive whatever
you decide on, so it's up to you, but there is a also a lot more
support (in my experience) for the NSR's these days. The Yamaha
community tend to be very 'clicky'! (Even a very pro-Yamaha mate of
mine is finally buying an NSR next month!!)
In my opinion the NSR is a superior motor and general package
altogether, and much higher quality of build than any Yamaha,
although a full F3 spec' Yam is probably more powerful. You will
need deep pockets to tune the TZR whereas the NSR can be quick with
very little work.
Anyone out there who feels they need to correct me on anything feel
free, I'm by no way an authority on these machines (including the
NSR!!)! :-)
Cheers,
Andy.
I can say after owning both a TZR 3XV and a NSR MC-28, the NSR out
performs the TZR in every aspect. Just for a note I did buy both
bikes in their stock original configuration and then fully
de-restricted. Now I do think that my TZR sounded 100 times
better
when stock than the NSR but that is the only thing I found to be
better a bout the 2 bikes in stock form. I did like both bikes very
much and would recomen either one to any one but if it were a
choise all of my money would be on the NSR. Let me bring up
annother possibility for you. I have never ridden the 96 and newer
RGV250 but I would definatly buy one without batting an eye over a
TZR. Look at it this way the 96 and newer is the newest 250
2-stroke (japanese) bike made. I have talked to people with the
newest generation RGV,s and they all have said that the bike will
make 70Hp without too much problems unlike the MC28 NSR's... before
a bunch of people jump down my throught on this I know there is a
few people that have 70Hp NSR's on the list but they all have done
very extensive mods to their bikes unlike the people with the
RGV's... Don't get me wrong though I would only reccomend a RGV to
either people I don't think deserve an NSR or people who I don't
like my heart and money go to the NSR!
Cheers!
Josh
The 70° RGV-R SP has some serious engine issues. Crank failures are
common on anything other than stock bikes.
The ram-air is trick though, and a 'kitted' bike does look
good!
I've owned a 90° RGV and it was quick, but the motor is shite,
again made out of chocolate! The guillotine PV design is crap, and
when they fail (often!) they drop down onto the piston crown and
destroy the cylinders and sometimes the crank due to the high
internal speeds involved!
The Mk2's USD front suspension is pretty good though, better than
the 3XV TZR's so I've been led to believe.
The 70° RGV is rare outside Japan, even rarer than the TZR V2, and
more so than the NSR. The 90° was shipped all over though, and
shares most internals with the Aprillia RS so spares are easily
obtained and cheap(ish)!
Having owned a TZR, an RGV, and an NSR, and only being in
possession of the NSR now (still, after nearly 8 years!!), I'll
leave it to you to guess which I think is superior!
Andy.
