WR400F vs WR450F

Blue Velvet

So just how much has the new Yamaha improved from the early one? Well, in a sense it’s a bit like trying to compare riders from different generations, the comparison is impossible because circumstances change. Not least you must remember we’re not dealing with a brand new WR400F here, but a 12-year-old bike that’s had various owners, done numerous seasons of racing and trail riding and been used and maintained in a variety of different ways. It’s unlikely to be in its prime.

That said, it did feel pretty good still, and everything was working fine on the bike (brakes, suspension, clutch etc), so certain conclusions can still be drawn. For instance the new bike is considerably faster (in the dry), much more powerful and linear, and far, FAR smoother than the older bike, and maintains that smoothness even as the revs increase, whereas the 400 just gets more thrashy the harder you rev it. The 450 packs a lot more punch in its midrange too – and whereas the 400 needs to be spinning hard to get the most out of the motor, the 450 works best when you shift up early and use the engine’s sizeable torque to drive it forwards.

You notice the difference in braking too, the new bike’s anchors are much more powerful, and that’s not because the old one’s weren’t working efficiently. In fact they worked very well, but the new bike has the benefits of a bigger front rotor and a more powerful braking system. Just as well really as this thing is a proper beast at times. Never more so than when the going turns sloppy…

Day three dawned cold and overcast, the sunshine of the previous two days was now just a memory, and as we found out, the trails would be more of a mixture of wet and dry too. Dry was fine, but when things get gloopy (particularly soft ruts), that gorgeous new bike turns downright ugly.

The problem stems from the 450F’s phenomenal powerplant. In the dry it manages to put down its power in a way that translates into forward momentum, but in the wet it’s another story. The twin-cam powerplant revs up so smoothly, so swiftly and so forcefully that it simply overwhelms the softly sprung suspension, and the tyres lose their unequal battle for grip with the substrate. And then instead of charging along headlong, you find yourself going very fast, and kinda’ sideways.

I kid you not, I went into one set of squidgy ruts with the power on, and found myself still heading forwards but with the bike on full-lock! The problem is that as it has grown up, the WR-F appears to have gained a few pounds of middle aged spread, the motor’s become ever more powerful and the suspension has been softened off to further improve comfort. And the combination of all these factors mitigate against finding grip in the wet. In fairness we’ve always said that about the 450 – both steel-framed bikes and alloy-framed ones have always been a real handful in the slop.

It’s strange because it gives the bike such a Jekyll and Hyde character. On the one hand it’s an absolutely fabulous trailbike for when the lanes are baked dry and there’s loads of miles to be covered in the day. In such circumstances the bike is an absolute joy to ride, covering the bumpy miles with admirable ease. But then if your day turns wet and slippery, then be prepared for lots of footing, and some much slower going.

Sure you can try charging through the wet stuff, but if you back off even for a second, the stock set-up loads-up the front end so much that it tramlines the ruts and you’re forced right down into it. We did try stiffening up the suspension a little and while it improves matters slightly, it only goes a small way to alleviating the problem.

Suspension-wise, the new bike feels much plusher (softer and more responsive to smaller bumps) than the old 400. And while some of that could easily be down to age and set-up, I’d be willing to bet that the new 450s are dialled in to be rather softer now than the old 400s were – more in keeping with their role as rapid trail bike rather than all-out racer. And that’s no bad thing, either. Handling-wise, well, there’s nothing really bad to report with either of these bikes – wet or dry. I like the way the new 450 steers – it’s typically ‘Japanese’ with solid, stable, and predictable handling, and never a hint of head-shake. Despite much slower steering, the 400 felt slightly easier to get turned than the modern bike (certainly in the wet), but that might have been down to its limited power as much as anything else.

But here’s a thing… you DO still notice the 400’s bulbous tank – not just when standing, but when you drop down onto the seat and try to slide forwards for a tight turn. It was one of the problems we pointed out at the very beginning, and now the present bike’s lovely smooth and open cockpit has vastly improved matters in that department, well, hopping back onto the old bike you notice it even more.

I’ve talked a bit about the obvious quality improvements over the years, but there are less obvious ones, too. The broader pegs are now made from alloy rather than steel, the seat is no longer covered in a cheap and shiny single-coloured smooth vinyl, but now has a non-slip, multi-textured fabric, the alloy swingarm has a lovely brushed aluminium finish to it rather than just being painted silver (I never understood why Yamaha chose to paint an alloy swingarm), and the new bike’s sidestand is not only made from lightweight alloy, but now tucks up out of harm’s way, where it won’t interfere with a trailing leg in a corner. That was another of the things we pointed out at the time.

But what of the 400’s Achilles heel – its starting difficulties. Well… I have to report that our one started easily. Very easily in fact. And although we never dropped it, nor got it caked in mud and hot to the point of boiling, I have to say that this was one of the bikes which DID start. So easily in fact, that once or twice it was quicker to fire up than the electric-start bike! Who says TBM never eats its words!?