2012 Kawasaki KLX250 Problems
Owner-reported complaints filed with NHTSA, grouped by component
Data refreshed
What this page shows
Everything below is an owner-reported complaint submitted to NHTSA about the 2012 Kawasaki KLX250, grouped by the component NHTSA recorded on the report. These are not confirmed defects, and they are not recalls. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a category with more reports in it is not evidence that a part is defective.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Reports by component
Ranked by how many owner reports name each component category
- Suspension1100.0%
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
Each component in detail
What the reports in each category say, in the owners' own words
Suspension
Reports naming suspension components — springs, struts, shocks, control arms and related hardware.
From owner reports, verbatim
2012 KAWASKI KLX250 MOTORCYCLE. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO FRONT WHEEL CAMBER PROBLEM *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED WHILE RIDING THE BIKE, HE NOTICED THE HANDLEBARS WERE NOT SQUARE TO THE BIKE WHEN TRAVELING IN A STRAIGHT LINE. INSTEAD, THEY WERE COCKED TO THE RIGHT. UPON CLOSER INSPECTION, HE NOTICED THE FRONT WHEEL HAD A CAMBER PROBLEM. HE NOTICED THE AXLE WAS NOT SQUARE TO THE FRONT FORKS, WHICH CAUSED THE TOP OF THE WHEEL TO BE CLOSER TO THE LEFT FORK, THAN THE RIGHT FORK AND CAUSED THE BIKE TO PULL TO THE LEFT WHEN TRAVELING WITH THE HANDLEBARS SQUARE TO THE BIKES FRAME. BY TURNING THE HANDLEBARS TO THE RIGHT, THE BIKE WOULD TRAVEL IN A STRAIGHT LINE, BUT WAS CAUSING THE BIKE TO RUN ABNORMALLY AND THE FRONT WHEEL NOT TO SPIN IN THE SAME PLANE AS THE REAR WHEEL. MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT WAS CAUSING THE FORKS TO BIND. THE CONSUMER STATED THE BINDING PROBLEM HAS BEEN EXACERBATED BY THE FACTORY USING EVERY BIT OF THE CLEARANCE OF THE INVOLVED PARTS TO SOMEWHAT CORRECT THE CAMBER ISSUE. THEY DID SO, BY CLAMPING THE LEFT FORK SLIGHTLY HIGHER IN THE YOKE THAN THE RIGHT FORK. THE CONSUMER BELIEVED THE DEFECT WAS PRODUCED IN ONE OF TWO WAYS; EITHER THE AXLE JOURNALS WERE DRILLED INCORRECTLY, AT AN ANGLE OTHER THAN 90 DEGREES TO THE FORKS, OR THE ALUMINUM CASTINGS WHICH CONTAINED THE AXLE JOURNALS WERE CASTED INCORRECTLY ONTO THE STEEL TUBES THAT ACCEPTED THEM. EVEN THOUGHT THE AXLE JOURNALS WERE DRILLED INCORRECTLY, THEY WERE NOT AT 90 DEGREES TO THE FORKS BECAUSE OF THE MISALIGNED CASTINGS. AFTER CAREFUL EXAMINATION, THE CONSUMER WAS MORE INCLINED TO BELIEVE IT WAS DUE TO IMPROPER CASTING. *JB
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers.
Elsewhere on this vehicle
Data sources
- NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation — owner-reported complaints and the components recorded on them
Data on this page last refreshed .