nklr: battery charger recommendations?

[Zachariah Mully]

So I finally got a chance this weekend while I was home to test ride my first ever Hardley Ableson, my brothers 2000 Electra Glide Std (I dunno, it was a FLTHPILEOFCRAP or something) which he bought sight unseen. So I expect gut wrenching torque out of this new rubber mount engine he's been gushing about (what is it, 1600cc's?), and sore eardrums from the straight pipes, but instead the bike couldn't get out of its own way and the only sore parts of me were my testes from the miserable seat on it. Also know why those guys don't ride their Harleys any distance? A new rear tire was needed to pass inspection and it ended up costing $175 for the tire and $60 for the labor to change it (1.5 hour procedure). If my tires cost that much I wouldn't ride anywhere either! Suspension sucked, brakes sucked, fairing sucked, instrumentation sucked, seat sucked... About the only thing I liked about the bike was the sideways opening topcase. Well, when I got back from my little spin and I thanked my father for saving me from blowing $15k on such a piece of merde, I couldn't shake how damn slow the bike was so I pulled the air filter housing and filter off to find what looked exactly like the carb on my KLR! Yes one single ~40mm (that's the KLR size right?) carb feeding two *huge* cylinders. That got me thinking that the bike is saddled with an air/fuel delivery system that is okay for a 650cc thumper but doesn't seem to be applicable to 1600cc v-twin monster. Figuring that you'd ride the beast at 3,000 rpms at most (anything more hurt I found), and assuming all 1600cc's was filled each revolution, that would be something like 4,800 liters of fuel/air a minute being sucked through that tiny carb. Using that same faulty logic, the KLR only consumes 650*3000/min = 1,950 liters/min!! How would you calculate the different in air velocity between these two? Must be a huge difference in velocity if you're trying to stuff almost 2.5x more air through the same opening. But then I remembered how poor the suspension felt and I realized that if they had actually fitted the bike with proper carbs, the bikes would be totally unrideable and the RUB's would have to trailer their rides *to* ride them. Zack <- counting my lucky stars that my KLR only cost me $1900

[Frank Sikorski]

Aaahhhhh!!! So that's why they call 'em HOGS!

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., Zachariah Mully wrote: > > So I finally got a chance this weekend while I was home to test > ride my first ever Hardley Ableson, my brothers 2000 Electra Glide Std (I > dunno, it was a FLTHPILEOFCRAP or something) which he bought sight unseen. > So I expect gut wrenching torque out of this new rubber mount > engine he's been gushing about (what is it, 1600cc's?), and sore eardrums > from the straight pipes, but instead the bike couldn't get out of its own > way and the only sore parts of me were my testes from the miserable seat > on it. Also know why those guys don't ride their Harleys any distance? A > new rear tire was needed to pass inspection and it ended up costing $175 > for the tire and $60 for the labor to change it (1.5 hour procedure). If > my tires cost that much I wouldn't ride anywhere either! > Suspension sucked, brakes sucked, fairing sucked, instrumentation > sucked, seat sucked... About the only thing I liked about the bike was the > sideways opening topcase. > Well, when I got back from my little spin and I thanked my father > for saving me from blowing $15k on such a piece of merde, I couldn't shake > how damn slow the bike was so I pulled the air filter housing and filter > off to find what looked exactly like the carb on my KLR! Yes one single > ~40mm (that's the KLR size right?) carb feeding two *huge* cylinders. > That got me thinking that the bike is saddled with an air/fuel > delivery system that is okay for a 650cc thumper but doesn't seem to be > applicable to 1600cc v-twin monster. Figuring that you'd ride the beast at > 3,000 rpms at most (anything more hurt I found), and assuming all 1600cc's > was filled each revolution, that would be something like 4,800 liters of > fuel/air a minute being sucked through that tiny carb. Using that same > faulty logic, the KLR only consumes 650*3000/min = 1,950 liters/min!! How > would you calculate the different in air velocity between these two? Must > be a huge difference in velocity if you're trying to stuff almost 2.5x > more air through the same opening. > But then I remembered how poor the suspension felt and I realized > that if they had actually fitted the bike with proper carbs, the bikes > would be totally unrideable and the RUB's would have to trailer their > rides *to* ride them. > > Zack

[RM]

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Zachariah Mully wrote:

>Suspension sucked, brakes sucked, fairing sucked, instrumentation >sucked, seat sucked...

Hmm, sounds like a stock KLR to me!

[Zachariah Mully]

Yeah, true a certain extent, but that is why our KLR's don't cost $15,000 either! I mean, the Hardley for sure would make a nice bike with another $5,000 or $6,000 thrown at the engine, but my gripe with it is you just *spent* $15k on it, why hell should you need to spend anymore on upgrades for something that expensive. If chrome is that expensive, then I am certainely in the wrong business. I guess my sense of economics has been ruined by owning both a KLR and a Concours. The beauty of the KLR is that it is so inexpensive I don't mind throwing a couple grand at my KLR-RR project bike. Even then my cash outlay is still under $4,000 *with* all the modifications that I have and will make to it. Z

On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, RM wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Zachariah Mully wrote: > > >Suspension sucked, brakes sucked, fairing sucked, instrumentation > >sucked, seat sucked... > > Hmm, sounds like a stock KLR to me! > > >

[Joe Smith]

. I guess my sense of economics has

> been ruined by owning both a KLR and a Concours. > The beauty of the KLR is that it is so inexpensive I don't mind > throwing a couple grand at my KLR-RR project bike.

In 1994 I bought a new Electra Glide, had pipes, open air filter, cam installed in it at a cost of about $1000, with other accessories I ran it up to about $16k. I rode the bike two years and sold it for $16k. My current FXD has pipes, screaming eagle flat slide carb and air filter and some suspension mods, including gold valve fork kit and Progressive shocks. Total cost of modification is about $1500, bike runs fine, certainly will out accelerate any of the Japanese cruisers I've run across. More important I really, really like the bike. If things stay like they are I expect to get most or all of my money out of it on resale if I should ever part with it. So tell me, then how is an HD such a bad deal from an economic standpoint? People that don't like HDs should never, ever buy one, lifes too short to have a bike you don't like, (one reason I don't have a KLR anymore), but this is my 35th motorcycle in 32 years of riding and it suits me better than anything else ever has. I still like my DR650, DR350 and Goldwing but I figure the HD is the keeper of the bunch. Flawed? Yes, but I'll tell you what I've learned out of owning all those bikes; they all are. Every bike is a compromise in some way, you just figure out where you're willing to compromise.

[KLR650@houston.rr.com]

> lifes [sic] too short to have a bike you don't like, (one reason I > don't have a KLR anymore)

Troll. Gerret DoD#839

[Dan Oaks]

Good write, Joe. -- bierdo Joe Smith wrote:

> . I guess my sense of economics has > > been ruined by owning both a KLR and a Concours. > > The beauty of the KLR is that it is so inexpensive I don't mind > > throwing a couple grand at my KLR-RR project bike. > > In 1994 I bought a new Electra Glide, had pipes, open air filter, cam > installed in it at a cost of about $1000, with other accessories I ran it up > to about $16k. I rode the bike two years and sold it for $16k. My current > FXD has pipes, screaming eagle flat slide carb and air filter and some > suspension mods, including gold valve fork kit and Progressive shocks. > Total cost of modification is about $1500, bike runs fine, certainly will > out accelerate any of the Japanese cruisers I've run across. More important > I really, really like the bike. If things stay like they are I expect to > get most or all of my money out of it on resale if I should ever part with > it. So tell me, then how is an HD such a bad deal from an economic > standpoint? > People that don't like HDs should never, ever buy one, lifes too short > to have a bike you don't like, (one reason I don't have a KLR anymore), but > this is my 35th motorcycle in 32 years of riding and it suits me better than > anything else ever has. I still like my DR650, DR350 and Goldwing but I > figure the HD is the keeper of the bunch. Flawed? Yes, but I'll tell you > what I've learned out of owning all those bikes; they all are. Every bike > is a compromise in some way, you just figure out where you're willing to > compromise. >

[Joe Smith]

Zachariah wrote

> 1) I can't imagine spending that much money on a bike in the first > place 2) I am so enamored with the KLR and Concours, that any more > expensive seems like a waste of money to me. Or maybe I am just a cheap > ass

It's just a different perspective. I'm by no means rich but motorcycles are my main hobby and its worth it to me to sacrifice in some areas to have the bikes I want. My wife laughs because I drive the cheapest possible Ford F150 and talk about not being able to imagine spending $20k on a new car but turn around and own two expensive bikes like the Goldwing and Super Glide. I'm sure someone would look at you owning two bikes (even though they are considered among the best values) and tell you they could not imagine spending that much money on motorcycles, yet you do it because you love them. Over all these years if I have learned one thing its that there are as many ways to look at and rationalize motorcycle ownership as there are owners. That is one of the things that makes it such an fun hobby. It only quits being fun when people start slamming each others choices or thinking they will only associate with others who own the same machine they do, apparently assuming that they are some kind of kindred spirit because of this. Its not something I do well with because I always considered myself a motorcycle enthusiast not a Harley owner or Goldwing owner or any other kind of owner. If we met on the road I would want to know all about your impressions and opinions of your bike and I would be willing to share same about mine, sadly, I see people getting away from that more and more. Joe

[Joe Smith]

Joe wrote

> > lifes [sic] too short to have a bike you don't like, (one reason I > > don't have a KLR anymore)

Gerret wrote

> Troll. > Gerret

Not true, although I could see why you would think that. I wanted to keep the email short but the truth is I had a 96 KLR, didn't care for the vibration, height and weight. Decided to try a DR650 instead which solves most of those problems although comes with its own set of shortcomings. I decided to stay on this list for a bit because there are some valuable tidbits about adventure touring that come up from time to time. Joe

[RM]

On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Joe Smith wrote:

>My wife laughs because I drive the cheapest possible Ford F150 and talk >about not being able to imagine spending $20k on a new car but turn >around and own two expensive bikes like the Goldwing and Super Glide.

I guess we're bitten by the moto-bug. My present car payments are $457/mo and I've been eyeballing the IS300 as my next car which could have even higher payments. Now that I own a KLR, I'm thinking of selling the present car and buying a base model Civic along with a Kawi ZR-7. I could put the ZR-7 on my Amex and the combined payment would still be less than what I'm paying for just the car now! RM PS. ...and when it comes to impressing the neighbors, a badass dirt-encrusted KLR with a fully-suited rider will out-macho a Ford Expedition with a chrome cattle-catcher by a 2:1 ratio.