--- In
DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com, "weazoe2000"
wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm interested in a KLR 650 but in reading through the lists here, I
> see a continuing theme in regards to the machines aparent lack of
> power. So before I buy I'd like to ask you owners a couple of
> questons:
> 1. How much power does the KLR actually have? I'd think a four valve
> 650 would be pushing quite a bit.
> 2. Subjectively, I know a bike without a lot of horsepower but with
a
> good power band can feel like it has a lot of get-up and go. How
does
> the bike feel to you? Is there enough power?
> 3. And finaly, are there readily available enhancements that
> substantially improve engine performance?
> Any answers you can give will be very much appreciated. Thanx.
Some of this comes back to the recent KLR 40hp debate that has
been so interesting of late. They're very capable in stock
condition, but that little bit of extra "snap" is available with
proper airbox, carb and pipe mods. I'm not trying to sound like a
broken record, but your post kinda touches on the only thing that is
lacking with what a KLR is intened for. Someone very appropriately
compared the KLR to a utility vehicle like a Jeep. Well even a Jeep
can have a different personality with a touch more fire under the
hood--especially the right kind of fire. Trade the 4.0 Jeep straight
six for a 210hp bone stock, throttle body 350, and you've got a
different animal. Peak horsepower is not dramatically different, but
the 350 obviously builds its power and torque quicker. This is very
useable, tractable power. The little power increase that one gets
with airbox, carb, and pipe mods is that kind of power. Our dyno
discussion didn't really get into horsepower/torque curves into any
depth, but this is where my "a$$ dyno" tells me that a benefit has
occurred. Maybe not so much in peak power, but how and when the
power comes on, such as in torque "and" horsepower. Getting a lot of
horsepower can often be detrimental to the performance of a
motorcycle in offroad conditions. The KX500 mentioned earlier (and
any other open-class motocrosser for that matter) is an example of
that. While pretty good on groomed MX or motard courses, they get to
be a major handful in true trail conditions in anyone's but the most
experienced rider's hands. The little bit of "pleasant" power
increase you get with the aforementioned mods to the KLR are the kind
that keep the bike controllable offroad and give a little extra
passing snap on the pavement. They are not expensive mods and do not
involve internal engine work. So your question about "substantial"
power increases might be kinda relative. I'm not sure I want a 50hp
KLR for my use. I could imagine my 350lb. KLR hitting that powerband
in a field of babyheads while climbing SOB hill in Canyonlands,
Utah. I do want a decent amount of tractable power in those
conditions so that I don't have to keep fanning the clutch to
maintain forward momentum. My dreambike, if money were no object,
might be one of those water-cooled XR650 desert sleds with all the
extras it takes to get it street legal and useful in an overall
manner. I think that bike still has reliability and tractable power,
though it still has compromise issues inherent in its design, and it
costs quite a few bucks to get there. Bottom line on the KLR: cheap,
reliable, useful, aftermarket cornucopia (lots of good junk), and low
cost mods to give a wider grin. Have fun with your decision.
Thad Carey
A15 (but no G.I. Joe)