Lem Recreational CX3 vs Qlink X-ranger 50 (2007)
Side-by-side spec comparison, pricing, and a plain-English breakdown of how the Lem Recreational CX3stacks up against the Qlink X-ranger 50. Numbers pulled from manufacturer spec sheets — click either bike for the full review.
Spec comparison
| Spec | Lem Recreational CX3 | Qlink X-ranger 50 |
|---|---|---|
| Model year | 2007 | 2007 |
| Price | — | — |
| Engine | 50 cc | 50 cc |
| Horsepower | 3 hp | 3 hp |
| Torque | — | 3 Nm |
| Weight | 45 kg | 60 kg |
| Seat height | 29 mm | 22 mm |
| Fuel capacity | 0.7 L | 0.8 L |
| Fuel type | petrol | petrol |
| Transmission | 1-speed | 3-speed |
| Front brakes | Single disc | Expanding brake (drum brake) |
| Rear brakes | Expanding brake (drum brake) | Expanding brake (drum brake) |
| Tires | — | 2.50-10 / 2.50-10 |
Lem Recreational CX3 vs Qlink X-ranger 50 — which should you buy?
Picking between the Lem Recreational CX3 and the Qlink X-ranger 50 usually comes down to the numbers you care about most. On paper, the Lem Recreational CX3 brings 3 hp in a 45 kg package, while the Qlink X-ranger 50 counters with 3 hp at 60 kg.
Our spec tables above highlight the winning number on each line. For the full rider-focused reviews including real-world fuel economy, service costs and available colors, click into either bike: