KAWASAKI KLX125 (2010 - on) Review

At a glance

Owners' reliability rating: 2.8 out of 5 (2.8/5)
Power: 10 bhp
Seat height: Medium (32.7 in / 830 mm)
Weight: Low (249 lbs / 113 kg)


New £2,999
Used N/A

Overall rating

Next up: Ride & brakes
2 out of 5 (2/5)

Rarely do mainstream manufacturers build a bike that doesn’t have at least one reason to buy it – but Kawasaki have pulled it off with the KLX125. It isn’t a dangerous bike, and it does perform a basic function as a commuter motorcycle, but there are plenty of other bikes that are considerably better than the KLX125.

Ride quality & brakes

Next up: Engine
2 out of 5 (2/5)

You’ll notice the KLX125 is tiny. It also has cheap chassis components. The combination makes for a wobbly, twitchy ride, especially for taller riders. It’s too weedy to ride off-road unless you enjoy battering a new bike mercilessly – anything other than a grassy lane is beyond it.


Next up: Reliability
2 out of 5 (2/5)

Learner riders are permitted up to 15bhp. So quite why Kawasaki’s all-new KLX125 has just 10bhp is anyone’s guess. It struggle to get over 60mph, and is lethargic getting there. It’s unintimidating to use, but 15bhp 125s aren’t either. For safety’s sake, a bit more power to overtake would be welcome.

Reliability & build quality

Next up: Value
2 out of 5 (2/5)

The simple engine should be tough as long as it’s serviced – it’s certainly under-stressed. But everything else is cheaply made, and won’t withstand abuse or neglect. There’s an awful lot of thinly-painted steel which is a prime candidate for rusting up fairly soon.

Value vs rivals

Next up: Equipment
2 out of 5 (2/5)

If it cost £2000, you could forgive some of the shortcomings. But it’s not – slightly more will get you pukka-spec 125s, or less will buy you a Honda CBF125, which performs the same task better, cheaper, just without the off-road focus. Find a Kawasaki KLX125 for sale.


2 out of 5 (2/5)

There isn’t really any to speak of. The digital dash looks good, and the green plastics look like a pukka motocross bike, but everything else has the crude look and feel of a Chinese bike – but at Japanese bike prices. There’s a small tool bag on the tail, which is about the extent of the luxuries. Shame that’s mostly useless too. Compare and buy parts for the KLX125 in the MCN Shop.


Engine size 125cc
Engine type Air-cooled 2v OHC single. Five gears, wet clutch. Chain drive
Frame type Steel perimeter
Fuel capacity 7 litres
Seat height 830mm
Bike weight 113kg
Front suspension None
Rear suspension None
Front brake 240mm disc, twin-piston caliper
Rear brake 190mm disc, single-piston caliper
Front tyre size 70/100-19
Rear tyre size 90/100-16

Mpg, costs & insurance

Average fuel consumption 75 mpg
Annual road tax £24
Annual service cost -
New price £2,999
Used price -
Insurance group -
How much to insure?
Warranty term Two year unlimited mileage

Top speed & performance

Max power 10 bhp
Max torque 7.38 ft-lb
Top speed 62 mph
1/4 mile acceleration -
Tank range 115 miles

Model history & versions

Model history

2010: New model

Other versions

Kawasaki D-Tracker 125: Supermoto version KLX with road tyres/wheels

Owners' reviews for the KAWASAKI KLX125 (2010 - on)

6 owners have reviewed their KAWASAKI KLX125 (2010 - on) and rated it in a number of areas. Read what they have to say and what they like and dislike about the bike below.

Review your KAWASAKI KLX125 (2010 - on)

Summary of owners' reviews

Overall rating: 2.8 out of 5 (2.8/5)
Ride quality & brakes: 3 out of 5 (3/5)
Engine: 2.3 out of 5 (2.3/5)
Reliability & build quality: 2.8 out of 5 (2.8/5)
Value vs rivals: 2.7 out of 5 (2.7/5)
Equipment: 2.5 out of 5 (2.5/5)
2 out of 5
06 May 2022 by Jaco

Year: 2011

Good seating position Super bad reliability

Ride quality & brakes 3 out of 5
Engine 3 out of 5
Reliability & build quality 1 out of 5

Half moon keeps shredding. Twice the starter gear broke in two. Electronics poor quality. Expensive parts. Never another Kawa in my life.

Value vs rivals 1 out of 5
Equipment 2 out of 5
3 out of 5 Perfect greenlaner for the short and inexperienced rider
13 June 2015 by Nyxlexica

Year: 2013

I would thoroughly recommend the KLX125 to anyone short in the leg who wants to build up confidence off-road. It lacks the specs necessary to keep you interested past the learning stage, however.

Ride quality & brakes 3 out of 5

Suspension is adequate for newbie offroading but poor beyond that, engine is weedy, pillion is a bad idea. Brakes are actually quite nice for the power. The bike stands out simply because its low seat height makes it such an unintimidating creature to take out green laning and such. You can be completely careless with it, which I think is a trait lost in a lot of motocross-tall trail bikes. You just don't need that much suspension travel on a lot of British trails.

Engine 2 out of 5

Not much torque at all so you have to rev it a bit more than your average street bike to keep it from stalling when pulling away - but it's a 125, so what do you expect?

Reliability & build quality 3 out of 5

I dumped one of these at maybe 15mph tops and the bar bent. Another had its FI light on all the time, although this never manifested in any way that might stop me riding it. Corrosion was not an issue on either bike and the plastics are just as hardy as any other off-road machine.

Value vs rivals 4 out of 5
Equipment 3 out of 5

Neat digital dash with rev counter, trip meter, clock, fuel warning light and speedo. Headlights etc make it all road-legal.

4 out of 5 Off Road
15 May 2014 by owensj

My review is quite different to the ones here. I spent a day on this bike off road in forests and in mud with Mick Extance - who I highly recommend. OK it may be poor on the roads which I expect it is. Off road however, it is a hoot! It is small an unintimidating yet quite capable of the most challenging off road stuff. Felt like it had a bit more than just the 10bhp. There may be better off road bikes out there but I feel 2 stars is a bit low of a rating. I liked it!

Ride quality & brakes 4 out of 5
Engine 4 out of 5
Reliability & build quality 3 out of 5
Value vs rivals 4 out of 5
Equipment 3 out of 5
2 out of 5 Weedy and uninspiring
04 January 2014 by Rogerborg

I rode a 2010 model today, and was seriously disappointed. It wasn't in bad nick, with little corrosion, and everything worked at it should. But that's about all I can find in its favour. The proportions are all wrong to begin with - anyone tall enough to suit the seat is going to swamp the bike. I felt very insecure perched on it, and with the crashy, wallowy ride, wasn't minded to explore the limits of what passes for handling. Performance was just dire. It felt weedier than the cheap HN125-8 (aka Lexmoto Vixen) Chinese bike I had a few years back, and I very much doubt that you'd see a real 62mph out of it on the flat. It makes a heck of a fuss doing it too, buzzing and vibrating like mad. All of that could be forgiven if it were cheap, but it isn't. £3K is a ridiculous price for such a wimpy bike, and sellers seem convinced that they're still worth nearly £2K even for the earliest ones. I'd honestly rather buy something like a Pulse Adrenaline brand new, and may end up doing so.

Ride quality & brakes 2 out of 5
Engine 1 out of 5
Reliability & build quality 3 out of 5
Value vs rivals 1 out of 5
Equipment 2 out of 5
3 out of 5 owners vid link review
15 May 2013 by rogersgjuk2

sorry the youtube link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXvSKGP-r8Q

Ride quality & brakes 3 out of 5
Engine 2 out of 5
Reliability & build quality 3 out of 5
Value vs rivals 3 out of 5
Equipment 3 out of 5
3 out of 5 1 year on 4k later
15 May 2013 by rogersgjuk2

I bought this little greeny as a commuter, just top do 36 miles to work and back again all weather.. I never looked at it in the metal, it was bought new and cheap and has never ever let me down. I starts first time, the seat is more comfortable than i expercted, I have used it through the snow and its been great to be fair. It is what it is, cheap reliable no rust on it, (its garaged every night) and I have change the oil n plug my self 3 times in the year. £7.50 to fill it up... lasts me a fortnight for work commute. I 100% agree with your review MCN, it does need more power, I once saw 65 mph and a normal plod at 50 is ok on the back roads. dual carriageways... forget it.. no guts at all and you do feel very vulnerable due to its small stature. so, if you want a reliable go all day bike, cheap, easy to maintain and you are on the small side and don't need speed. this is a good start. i made a youtube video when i got it new ill make a new one tomorrow 1yr on.

Ride quality & brakes 3 out of 5
Engine 2 out of 5
Reliability & build quality 4 out of 5
Value vs rivals 3 out of 5
Equipment 2 out of 5
Back to top