rear shock and mefo tires

[testa42002]

I am looking to get a new KLR sometime soon (unless I learn I shouldn't). I guess that the 2005 model year is a A19. What are the diferences, if any, from the previous models? Is one of the models better than the others? Always want the best, you know how it is! Thanks for any clarity on the matter.............John

[kdxkawboy@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/16/2005 7:46:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, testa42002@... writes: I am looking to get a new KLR sometime soon (unless I learn I shouldn't). I guess that the 2005 model year is a A19. What are the diferences, if any, from the previous models? Is one of the models better than the others? Always want the best, you know how it is! Thanks for any clarity on the matter.............John But for the continual churning of the bold new graphics you would have a hard time telling one year from another. I think the only real significant change came in 97 when the cam timing was changed to provide more low end torque, the clutch got changed to an easier pull and you no longer could retrofit a kick starter. Oh, and that was the year I think the countershaft sprocket changed from a retainer clip to big nut. The improvements were more or less adopted from the defunct KLX line. Pat G'ville, NV [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Keith Saltzer]

> But for the continual churning of the bold new graphics you would

have a

> hard time telling one year from another. I think the only real

significant

> change came in 97 when the cam timing was changed to provide more

low end torque,

> the clutch got changed to an easier pull and you no longer could

retrofit a

> kick starter. Oh, and that was the year I think the countershaft

sprocket

> changed from a retainer clip to big nut. The improvements were

more or less

> adopted from the defunct KLX line. > > Pat > G'ville, NV

Yep, all that stuff is correct. They also made the crankshaft heavier and the doohickey hold down bolt got a slight change too. The California model has a bit more crap on it too of coarse. Other than that they are all the same and you just about can't go wrong finding one with less than 10,000 miles on it. MrMoose A8 (Barbie and Ken special)

[Guillaume McDowell]

[snipped for clarity]

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 03:45:21 -0000, testa42002 wrote: > > > I am looking to get a new KLR sometime soon (unless I learn I > shouldn't). Is one of the models > better than the others? YES! The 1994/5 A8/A9 are the best ones. Don't let anybody tell you they're sissy bikes. They handle, accelerate, and brake waay better than any of the other years. Yessiree, the A8 is Great! Don't be fooled by white, red, or green imitators; the Amazing Technicolor Dreambike is the one you REALLY want. Always want the best, you know how it is! > Thanks for any clarity on the matter.............John I hope things are clearer now. -realpolitiklr

[klr250not]

Looks count for something and the A19 is one of the better years in that department. And I don't see how anyone really knows there have been no mechanical changes since the 1996 or 97 mods. Kawasaki seems very tight lipped in the information they let out. Official horsepower-- 48 at the crankcase--hasnt even been listed since 2001 or so. Torque is still listed and hasnt changed--41 ft lb at 5500 rpm as I recall--but I'm not sure they'd bother to update anything. The horsepower and torque data were found on Kawasaki's international site after clicking around awhile. --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "testa42002" wrote:

> > I am looking to get a new KLR sometime soon (unless I learn I > shouldn't). I guess that the 2005 model year is a A19. What are

the

> diferences, if any, from the previous models? Is one of the models > better than the others? Always want the best, you know how it is! > Thanks for any clarity on the matter.............John

[wannabsmooth1]

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "klr250not" wrote: Snipped... > And I don't see how anyone really knows there have been no > mechanical changes since the 1996 or 97 mods. Kawasaki seems very > tight lipped in the information they let out. Official horsepower-- > 48 at the crankcase--hasnt even been listed since 2001 or so. > Torque is still listed and hasnt changed--41 ft lb at 5500 rpm as I > recall--but I'm not sure they'd bother to update anything. snipped You might want to spend a few hours at buykawasaki.com. Some of us have spent a LOT of time going over part numbers, that gives a good start on this kind of knowledge. Some have had many, many engines and/or bikes apart, too. That also give a pretty good clue as to what has changed and what hasn't. Sometimes Kawasaki changes the part number, and all that was changed was the colot, too. The changeover year was 1996. I've seen several '95's with a mix of parts. The clutch was updated, with more plates. The tranny went from a 3dog gearbox to a 4dog. The balancer sprockets went to solid, instead of a spring and pin kludge. The cams and crank changed, as noted above, and IIRC, that was the year of the updated charging system, where it has maybe 3 to 5 more watts available. Mike Eagle Mfg & Eng since 1990 San Diego, Ca

[Bogdan Swider]

> YES! The 1994/5 A8/A9 are the best ones.

Malibu Ken would agree. Bogdan

[Edgar Hines]

Another newbie. I have a 2003 KLR that I purchased in August with 2700 street miles on it. I now have almost 4200 miles on it, almost all street miles. This is only my third street legal bike, but I have been riding for over 30 years. I live in north Texas and am looking for someone to ride with. I would like to put this bike to better use (dirt, dirt, dirt). Yesterday my rear shock blew on my way to work. Has any one else had any problems with there stock shock? Also I am interested in new tires and have been looking at MEFO as advertised by KLR.com. Anyone have experience with these? Look forward to reading the tips from all of you. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Bill Watson]

Eagle Mike wrote: The changeover year was 1996. IIRC, that was the year of the updated charging system, where it has maybe 3 to 5 more watts available. -------------------------------- Maybe you meant 3 to 5 more AMPS. I believe the charging system went from 196 watts to 230 during the changeover. I have the numbers at home and will check them tonight. If I am wrong, I will repost. Bill Watson __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]