engine problem

[cactus_reese]

I have never read a more negative review of the KLR than what was published in the latest DSN issue. Maybe I'm sensitive, but it seemed to spend much more time on the negatives than on the positives (not unlike an NBC report on the war). It was as if Toby was justifying why he got rid of his. And where does Toby get a weight of 420 lbs? Assuming the 337 lb dry weight is correct, adding 5 lbs for oil and coolant and 38 lb for a full fuel tank only gets you to 380 lbs. I have ridden with others who have XRs, DRs, and KTMs and can pretty much go anywhere they can (although the XRs and KTM640s and below can clearly jump higher and take more challenging lines). I like the added comfort the KLR affords getting to and from the riding area. My thoughts when reading the article were, "Wow, this is a harsh review of the bike that made the magazine". -Bryan <-- Sensitive because all his riding buddies have defected to other bikes.

[Guy B. Young II]

I haven't read the article yet, and wished I hadn't read your comments either. I will, however, try to go at it with an open mind. Durn! Guy A16 - getting prepped for GDR II Richmond, VA -----Original Message-----

>From: cactus_reese >Sent: Mar 26, 2006 12:00 PM >To: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Slide- Why so negative on the KLR? > >I have never read a more negative review of the KLR than what was >published in the latest DSN issue. Maybe I'm sensitive, but it >seemed to spend much more time on the negatives than on the >positives (not unlike an NBC report on the war). It was as if Toby >was justifying why he got rid of his. > >And where does Toby get a weight of 420 lbs? Assuming the 337 lb dry >weight is correct, adding 5 lbs for oil and coolant and 38 lb for a >full fuel tank only gets you to 380 lbs. > >I have ridden with others who have XRs, DRs, and KTMs and can pretty >much go anywhere they can (although the XRs and KTM640s and below >can clearly jump higher and take more challenging lines). I like the >added comfort the KLR affords getting to and from the riding area. > >My thoughts when reading the article were, "Wow, this is a harsh >review of the bike that made the magazine". > >-Bryan other bikes. > > > > > >Archive Quicksearch at: http://www.angelfire.com/ut/moab/klr650_data_search.html >List sponsored by Dual Sport News at: www.dualsportnews.com >List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html >Member Map at: http://www.frappr.com/dsnklr650 >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > >

[Jeff Saline]

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 17:00:09 -0000 "cactus_reese" writes:

> I have never read a more negative review of the KLR than what was > published in the latest DSN issue.

Biggee Snippage

>>>>>>

Bryan, I read that article also and had similar impressions. The weight discrepancy really caught my eye and my math didn't figure like that in the article. But heck, that was only one guy's impression. I don't know anything about his experience level or expectations with bikes and their components. But I do know about my experiences and expectations. I'll go with my impressions. My review would say the bike is fine for what it is. : ) Last year my KLR was the only bike I rode. A few weeks ago I got out my 1975 BMW R90/6 and got it running again. I took it for a quick 20 mile jaunt before changing the fluids and it was pleasing to say the least. I did find myself liking the power of the /6 but also had to remind myself a few times to back off and control myself. I don't have to do that quite as much with the KLR as it just doesn't have the same power. And I like that since it keeps me from doing so many stupid things on a fun bike. Best, Jeff Saline ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650, 79 R100RT

[Krgrife@aol.com]

In a message dated 3/26/2006 9:02:10 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, cactus_reese@... writes: I have never read a more negative review of the KLR than what was published in the latest DSN issue. Maybe I'm sensitive, but it seemed to spend much more time on the negatives than on the positives (not unlike an NBC report on the war). It was as if Toby was justifying why he got rid of his. I thought it was pretty objective even from a long time KLR rider's viewpoint. It is a good highway bike, it is a good rough road bike but I have never thought of it as equal to the XL's, DR's and other more dirt oriented dual sports. That has just not mattered to me since the long distance comfort more than made up for the compromises on the other end of the scale. All depends on what you want the bike to do. BTW, Toby still owns his KLR. Regards, Kurt [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[John Biccum]

I have not read the DSN article yet but I know where *I* got the weight of 420 pounds: from the State of Washington certified truck scale at exit 25 on I-90. I was passing by one day when the scale house was closed and decided to weigh the bike. The State leaves the electronic scale on and you can read the digital readout through the window of the scale house. I weighed my KLR with its Happy Trails NW rack, two empty GiVi E36s and most of a tank of fuel. Result: 420 pounds. I don't know what the GiVis and the NW rack weigh, probably less than 20 pounds in total. So maybe 400 pounds ready to ride is a realistic weight for the KLR. Maybe the DSN article weight includes a tank bag and some tools? Kawasaki, like most moto manufacturers, features some *very* creative weights in their literature. So I would assume that the 337 pound dry weight came from their marketing department rather than their engineering department. -----Original Message----- From: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of cactus_reese Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 9:00 AM To: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Slide- Why so negative on the KLR? I have never read a more negative review of the KLR than what was published in the latest DSN issue. Maybe I'm sensitive, but it seemed to spend much more time on the negatives than on the positives (not unlike an NBC report on the war). It was as if Toby was justifying why he got rid of his. And where does Toby get a weight of 420 lbs? Assuming the 337 lb dry weight is correct, adding 5 lbs for oil and coolant and 38 lb for a full fuel tank only gets you to 380 lbs. I have ridden with others who have XRs, DRs, and KTMs and can pretty much go anywhere they can (although the XRs and KTM640s and below can clearly jump higher and take more challenging lines). I like the added comfort the KLR affords getting to and from the riding area. My thoughts when reading the article were, "Wow, this is a harsh review of the bike that made the magazine". -Bryan http://www.angelfire.com/ut/moab/klr650_data_search.html List sponsored by Dual Sport News at: www.dualsportnews.com List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html Member Map at: http://www.frappr.com/dsnklr650 Yahoo! Groups Links

[revmaaatin]

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "John Biccum" wrote: So I would assume that the 337 pound dry

> weight came from their marketing department rather than their

engineering

> department. >

Hi John, I would agree that it appears there is some screwy math at work...just a guess, but it would appear that the big difference is that the marketing dept weighed the bike without air in the tires. but I could be wrong. Maybe the Dunlop's were also thread-bare. I have never weighed my bike as a factory bike, as it has been up- armored, but I do know that my GDR equipped bike, with me (185 lbs, 30 inseam) and the kitchen sink (double, white enamel) full fuel (89 octane) weighed in at 825lbs + at the local grain elevator. I need to remember to leave the sink at home, or at least, get a plastic sink.... revmaaatin.

[Andrew Tuning]

I just got home from an afternoon ride and am curious, I don't see any difference in what the Marketing Dept. says the dry weight is and what you guys are showing full fluid capacity. Dry weight is measured with NO FLUIDS (Hence the term "dry weight") The bike did not have anti-freeze, oil, fuel... So when you do a full capacity weight of the bike, you have to take these into consideration. Just my 2 cents worth... -Andy BIFBR Andyt59@... http://myweb.cableone.net/tbernard -----Original Message----- From: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of revmaaatin Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 5:22 PM To: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Re: Slide- Why so negative on the KLR? > --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "John Biccum" wrote: So I would assume that the 337 pound dry

> weight came from their marketing department rather than their

engineering

> department. >

Hi John, I would agree that it appears there is some screwy math at work...just a guess, but it would appear that the big difference is that the marketing dept weighed the bike without air in the tires. but I could be wrong. Maybe the Dunlop's were also thread-bare. I have never weighed my bike as a factory bike, as it has been up- armored, but I do know that my GDR equipped bike, with me (185 lbs, 30 inseam) and the kitchen sink (double, white enamel) full fuel (89 octane) weighed in at 825lbs + at the local grain elevator. I need to remember to leave the sink at home, or at least, get a plastic sink.... revmaaatin. Archive Quicksearch at: http://www.angelfire.com/ut/moab/klr650_data_search.html List sponsored by Dual Sport News at: www.dualsportnews.com List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html Member Map at: http://www.frappr.com/dsnklr650 Yahoo! Groups Links

[cactus_reese]

Good to hear that Toby still has his KLR. My belief is that a KLR with a 14 tooth front sprocket, progressive fork springs, and a dipped Corbin doesn't give up much off-road to a DR650. It is hard to make comparsons like that though when different riders are involved. I surely feel more comfortable riding sandy washes on a water cooled bike in the summers in Tucson. -Bryan

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, Krgrife@... wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/26/2006 9:02:10 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > cactus_reese@... writes: > > I have never read a more negative review of the KLR than what was > published in the latest DSN issue. Maybe I'm sensitive, but it > seemed to spend much more time on the negatives than on the > positives (not unlike an NBC report on the war). It was as if Toby > was justifying why he got rid of his. > > > I thought it was pretty objective even from a long time KLR rider's > viewpoint. It is a good highway bike, it is a good rough road bike but I have never > thought of it as equal to the XL's, DR's and other more dirt oriented dual > sports. That has just not mattered to me since the long distance comfort more > than made up for the compromises on the other end of the scale. All depends > on what you want the bike to do. BTW, Toby still owns his KLR. > Regards, > Kurt > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >

[prackley]

I have noticed that Kawasaki is not represented in the VIP links section of "http://www.dualsportnews.com". Now I'm not saying that makes a difference in the review, but it's something to think about. Both Suzuki and KTM are listed with Suzuki having a major presence on the page. Overall, I think the article was a pretty fair representation of the KLR, but it did seem to concentrate more on the negative aspects of the bike rather than accentuating the positives. This being only my second issue of DSN I'm not sure what is usually included for content, but this month's issue definitely seemed to lack meaningful substance. Nice pictures though. Peter, A19 --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "cactus_reese" wrote:

> > I have never read a more negative review of the KLR than what was > published in the latest DSN issue. Maybe I'm sensitive, but it > seemed to spend much more time on the negatives than on the > positives (not unlike an NBC report on the war). It was as if Toby > was justifying why he got rid of his. > > And where does Toby get a weight of 420 lbs? Assuming the 337 lb

dry

> weight is correct, adding 5 lbs for oil and coolant and 38 lb for

a

> full fuel tank only gets you to 380 lbs. > > I have ridden with others who have XRs, DRs, and KTMs and can

pretty

> much go anywhere they can (although the XRs and KTM640s and below > can clearly jump higher and take more challenging lines). I like

the

> added comfort the KLR affords getting to and from the riding area. > > My thoughts when reading the article were, "Wow, this is a harsh > review of the bike that made the magazine". > > -Bryan

to

> other bikes. >

[Mark Sampson]

I guess I pretty much agreed with the article. But just as one example----the suspension--------yeh, single track aggressive offroad riders riding around in circles with a leash tied to their pickup truck (which I used to do) would scoff at the KLR suspension. However for me the softer suspension is a plus-----for doing really big 5 or 10,000 mile offroad and backroad rides. It all boils down to keeping any bike in its element. Everybody's got their own riding element. Get the bike out of it's element and the fun decreases. I love the KLR's "element". Mark Sampson www.bigdogadventures.com