I had a chance to spend some time with a friend's 2011 KTM 300 XCW. This year, KTM has finally added a sixth gear to bikes along its model line.
The 2011 KTM is an improvement over past model years (I've recently ridden a few 09 and 10 models, both 250 and 300). The 2011 motor is less buzzy and seems to pull into upper revs a bit more lively. However, I have seen this same variance in nearly identical bikes. Four years ago I rode nearly identical 2006 KTM 300 XC and XCW. One was buzzy, the other was fairly smooth. Both were jetted very well.
I helped jet this particular bike so even though the owner doesn't like tweaking jetting like I do, it was close enough. Given that so many bikes are jetted haphazardly I can't say that my motor comparisons in this instance are necessarily a gold standard.
While the motors on the KTM 250 and GG 250 can be compared as being designed for similar roles, the KTM 300 and the GG 300 are not at all alike. The KTM 300 is a chugger down low, as one would suspect. The Orange power builds smoothly enough (middle PV spring) and continues to a rush of speed. Very satisfying. The Gas Gas 300 is of a different nature. On the GG 300s I have ridden, the bottom seems a bit softer in comparison. Again, I can't vouch for the jetting of another's bike here in Phoenix at 100F and 1500 feet or in Flagstaff last weekend at 8000 feet and 85F. This particular '08 GG 300 was definitely jetted a little fat even for Tucson at 1500. It burbled off-idle to mid throttle up in Flagstaff. Of course, my non-jetting-Nazi KTM friend didn't re-jet his 2010 300 for Flagstaff either, but it still rode okay and at least I got a chance to ride it in Phoenix where l could attest to the jetting there.
Given all that, as I revved the GG300 up through the range, I found nearly (but not quite) the same satisfying bottom torque (despite the fat pilot jet and who knows what air screw setting) and the same rush to mid and upper revs. But it was at that point that the Gasser 300 motor showed what made it different. It had that rush and then kept going. I actually had to back off a bit (I'm known for my slow). This wasn't a KTM300 motor. It was more like a 250 with 20% (50cc) more attitude. Naturally, ignition types and fly wheel weight difference between brands and even between makes (EC vs DE) can change everything. So, your mileage may vary.
The handling of the 2011 KTM was improved. Despite that the 2011 KTM rider is 6+ and I'm 5'9", and he had the bars full forward, I instantly felt very comfortable on the bike. Yes, I would have moved the bars back all the way. Yes, the seat was a bit too high for me. Those quibbles aside, the new KTM had light steering and rolled into turns very quickly. Yes, quicker than my '05 DE250 (caveat to come). As I compare this to my 2005, I have to note that I have a Scotts steering damper which slows down the bar rate. As well, I have the steering head nut on fairly tight. Additionally, I have a 3.2 gallon Clark tank that puts a lot of weight up high when compared to the stock KTM tank. Still, the KTM inputed well. Even with those seeming advantages, the KTM didn't actually turn faster than my 2005 GG -- maybe a bit slower than my old Gasser. And I would wager that it turned slower than my friend's 2008 GG 300. On the plus side, this is the first KTM that I would even consider going without a damper. I didn't get any bad signs of instability from the KTM. It wasn't quite as good as my '05, but a good performance improvement nonetheless. I could take or leave the Scotts damper on my GG.
The front forks of the 2011 KTM worked pretty well. I would say nearly on par with my LTR-revavled and resprung Zokes forks. I didn't have a complaint with the KTM. A friend bought a 2010 KTM250XC several months ago and said the suspension was brutal as he attempted to break them in. He took them to a local suspension guy (Bob Tod of Future Shoxs), and I can attest that they are some of the best forks I've ever pounded rocks and whoops on. Very supple and (according to the owner), no bottoming on cased jumps on the MX track (he's not much of a jumper).
Now, onto the shock and still-linkless suspension. I was not impressed. As I rammed through whoops small and large, it felt like the swing arm was a foot shorter than on the GG. The impact of the rear end was... eh, "not subtle." It is a glaring divergence from what would be a heck of a bike. Until they fix that...
The 2011 KTM is an improvement over past model years (I've recently ridden a few 09 and 10 models, both 250 and 300). The 2011 motor is less buzzy and seems to pull into upper revs a bit more lively. However, I have seen this same variance in nearly identical bikes. Four years ago I rode nearly identical 2006 KTM 300 XC and XCW. One was buzzy, the other was fairly smooth. Both were jetted very well.
I helped jet this particular bike so even though the owner doesn't like tweaking jetting like I do, it was close enough. Given that so many bikes are jetted haphazardly I can't say that my motor comparisons in this instance are necessarily a gold standard.
While the motors on the KTM 250 and GG 250 can be compared as being designed for similar roles, the KTM 300 and the GG 300 are not at all alike. The KTM 300 is a chugger down low, as one would suspect. The Orange power builds smoothly enough (middle PV spring) and continues to a rush of speed. Very satisfying. The Gas Gas 300 is of a different nature. On the GG 300s I have ridden, the bottom seems a bit softer in comparison. Again, I can't vouch for the jetting of another's bike here in Phoenix at 100F and 1500 feet or in Flagstaff last weekend at 8000 feet and 85F. This particular '08 GG 300 was definitely jetted a little fat even for Tucson at 1500. It burbled off-idle to mid throttle up in Flagstaff. Of course, my non-jetting-Nazi KTM friend didn't re-jet his 2010 300 for Flagstaff either, but it still rode okay and at least I got a chance to ride it in Phoenix where l could attest to the jetting there.
Given all that, as I revved the GG300 up through the range, I found nearly (but not quite) the same satisfying bottom torque (despite the fat pilot jet and who knows what air screw setting) and the same rush to mid and upper revs. But it was at that point that the Gasser 300 motor showed what made it different. It had that rush and then kept going. I actually had to back off a bit (I'm known for my slow). This wasn't a KTM300 motor. It was more like a 250 with 20% (50cc) more attitude. Naturally, ignition types and fly wheel weight difference between brands and even between makes (EC vs DE) can change everything. So, your mileage may vary.
The handling of the 2011 KTM was improved. Despite that the 2011 KTM rider is 6+ and I'm 5'9", and he had the bars full forward, I instantly felt very comfortable on the bike. Yes, I would have moved the bars back all the way. Yes, the seat was a bit too high for me. Those quibbles aside, the new KTM had light steering and rolled into turns very quickly. Yes, quicker than my '05 DE250 (caveat to come). As I compare this to my 2005, I have to note that I have a Scotts steering damper which slows down the bar rate. As well, I have the steering head nut on fairly tight. Additionally, I have a 3.2 gallon Clark tank that puts a lot of weight up high when compared to the stock KTM tank. Still, the KTM inputed well. Even with those seeming advantages, the KTM didn't actually turn faster than my 2005 GG -- maybe a bit slower than my old Gasser. And I would wager that it turned slower than my friend's 2008 GG 300. On the plus side, this is the first KTM that I would even consider going without a damper. I didn't get any bad signs of instability from the KTM. It wasn't quite as good as my '05, but a good performance improvement nonetheless. I could take or leave the Scotts damper on my GG.
The front forks of the 2011 KTM worked pretty well. I would say nearly on par with my LTR-revavled and resprung Zokes forks. I didn't have a complaint with the KTM. A friend bought a 2010 KTM250XC several months ago and said the suspension was brutal as he attempted to break them in. He took them to a local suspension guy (Bob Tod of Future Shoxs), and I can attest that they are some of the best forks I've ever pounded rocks and whoops on. Very supple and (according to the owner), no bottoming on cased jumps on the MX track (he's not much of a jumper).
Now, onto the shock and still-linkless suspension. I was not impressed. As I rammed through whoops small and large, it felt like the swing arm was a foot shorter than on the GG. The impact of the rear end was... eh, "not subtle." It is a glaring divergence from what would be a heck of a bike. Until they fix that...
Last edited:
