Modern Vespa

I'm still in a holding pattern waiting for my 300 Super to arrive. In the meantime, I was wondering about the 300's highway performance. I took a couple of test rides on brand new (7 kms on the odometer) 300 Super and wasn't that impressed with the highway performance. I actually thought that my 250 with Corsa Powerbooster and LV pipe were better on the highway with a greater top end. Now another variable other than the fact that the 300 wasn't broken in was that the 300 didn't have a flyscreen while my 250 did. For those with 300's which are broken in and who have ridden a 250, how do you compare the highway performance. Will I be disappointed in the 300 on the highway?

Top speed is no different. Acceleration in the low-mid range is hugely improved.

So 'Highway performance' isn't improved at all. It never claimed to be.

I wasn't expecting the 300 to be better on the highway, just not worse as my test ride experience was. But I am guessing (which is why I want some first hand experience comments) that the poorer performance of the 300 was related to the lack of flyscreen along with the unbroken in engine.

I'm convinced that the addition of a flyscreen is probably the most significant performance mod you can make to a Vespa.

Top speed, acceleration, and fuel economy are all greatly improved.

So 250 with flyscreen would feel better at high speed than a 300 without.

When your 300 comes in, after a couple thousand miles (and a flyscreen), be sure to tell us what you think--inquiring minds want to know.

P.

Oh I certainly will, I will also put my flyscreen from my 250 onto the 300. I have to admit that I'm getting a bit impatient about waiting for the 300. The only reason I'm waiting is that I want a Dragon Red one. One of the reasons for that is that I want to put my current topcase from my 250 onto the new bike since it has a brake light on it. If it wasn't for that, I'd probably have a white one already.

When I test drove a 300 demo with 180 miles against a used 2007 250 with 1500 miles, the 250 definitely felt faster top-end on the highway. No screen on either.

I went with the 300 anyway and added a fly-screen. Now with 900 miles my top-end is up from what I experienced on that demo, but I don't think I've hit 80mph yet. Indicated struggles to get to 85 with WOT. I need to do a test with gps, but I'm guessing it is topping out around 75. That used 250 easily got to indicated of 90. I guess it is also possible the speedo for 2007 250 and the 2010 300 don't compare and they both hit the same top-end.

Anyway, I assume with more break-in things can only improve and I've done a fair amount of highway travel with the 300 and it has been great. Quickly gets me to indicated 75-80. Then it struggles from there, but I don't really need to go faster on the highways I frequent. I'm usually passing versus being passed.

brilaz, thanks for your comments. I was starting to think I was imagining things incorrectly from my test ride, but your comments match what I had found.

I found that my 300 didn't really open up until I put about 2500 miles on the clock. One day while hauling ass on the freeway, all of a sudden it hit the rev limiter and I was doing close to 90 on the speedo (actual 80 mph)! And that was before I added the flyscreen. Give it time and ride it like a banshee, soon enough yours will reach its full potential.

WADR, and I love you as a Brother, but heed my words...
1. You are way over-analyzing this thing.
2. You are using strictly subjective impressions to dictate the course of your thinking. Danger, Will Robinson!!
2.5 I am pretty near sick of people reporting subjective seat-of-the-pants impressions as though they were fact. Next thing you know we'll be chucking wenches in the pond to see if they are witches.
3. There isn't so much of a difference between the 250 and 300 that if the 250 is modded, you would be able to actually, subjectively, tell what the diff was after a couple of non-empirically controlled trips.
4. See # 1
5. I have a 300 and it is wonderful. Don't Worry, Be Frakin Happy.

I've been thinking of getting the fly screen ... after reading this and other comments, I'm convinced it may help. Which fly screen do you have (Prima, Vespa, etc)?

I ended up going with the vespa fly. There is a lot of great info here to guide you on the topic of wind screens, so do some work with the search engine and you will be enlightened.

My 300 seems a bit winded at the top end as well. I can hit the same top speed, but it's harder to get that last bit of it out on the 300.

Of course, off the line performance is hugely improved.

If somebody would just decode the rev-limiter, we could probably see another 5-10 mph on a modded 250.

Somebody should get some computer nerds on this problem right away.

My 300 hits the rev limiter at 84.9 mph by GPS. This was on a long down hill run. I have a cut down tall Falco. I do think it was a little faster with a fly screen I had on it when new, but the wind noise and face buffeting were not good. On my trip to Amerivespa, I ran 70-75 mph with out much difficulty and had some extra weight from gear. I am considering adding a PM 68 + the fuel injection ? modual, but it is pretty good stock. Most bikes seem slow to me after riding my GW 1800. I have not riden the 250.

I got the Vespa one. After I bought it (yeah, I was in a hurry and didn't do any research) I looked at some others and they seemed thinner and flimsier, so I'm glad I got the Vespa. YMMV of course.

P.

My 300 gets the same top speed on the highway as my 250 used to (probably due to my weight and the full screen), but it is slightly more stable than the 250. Mileage is approximately the same too.

I notice that the center of gravity of the 300 seems to be more centrally located than the 250.

If you're used to some performance mods on the 250 you may want to consider doing them for the 300 too.

Hope this helps.

after babysitting your 300 to Los Gatos (with V on it) I'm inclined to agree. I feel like my GT would behave better on the top end.

Of course that low end was fantastic.

Interesting mix of responses, thanks all. I guess I will eventually find out, but my impression is that the 300 does in fact get winded as Jess near the top end more so than the 250. However, it does reach about the same top speed. The benefit of course is in the low end grunt that it has in spades over the 250.

For me the whole discussion seems to beg the question. If your 250 "feels" faster than the 300, but your 250 has some performance additions that the 300 you drove does not. Then what would the same 300 feel like with similar mods?

Your seat of the pants performance loss, most likely comes more down to the fact that the performance exhaust on your 250 breathes better at higher revs (highway speeds)..and the restrictive stock exhaust is choking the 300 a little. Slap your stock exhaust back on your 250 and see how it feels. Or try a 300 with a performance exhaust. You get the picture I'm sure.

It could also be that the gearing is set differently between the two, or the power curve is shifted down for more fun at slower speeds on the 300...I've no idea.

It only makes sense to my little monkey brain though, that if the transmissions are the same, the rev limiters are the same, and the mods are similar, more CCs is going to equal more performance somewhere in the scoot's operating range.

What I sense as a question though is...is the 300 worth trading up to from my 250? Only you can say that. The 300 will never blow the doors off the 250. It's a 300 in name only right? It's actually a 275cc engine or some such as I remember. Bigger, but only in a boys locker room kind of way. You've got to look pretty close to prove the point.