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