KLR700

Having ridden a couple Stateside I find they are hopelessly underpowered, heavy, uncomfortable and totally lacking character.

They are pretty bomb proof though and the old Yanks seems to like pottering along on these contraptions.

I agree with you Sarge, other than them being uncomfortable, and to a lesser extent bomb proof. The riding position is VERY open, upright, and comfortable, hell your knees are barely even bent. The seat is long and flat just like bikes of old (probably because IT is an old bike). I had two KLR's a 1998 and the later "improved" 2008 with the 08's fairing having even nicer wind management than a R1200GS I had at the time.
However its flexy frame/suspension made it more akin to a carnival ride when riding briskly on curvy paved roads than a modern motorcycle. I finally settled on just aiming the thing in the middle of the lane through corners so when it weaved around I was still in the lane. Something about the engine design caused it to be very hard on oil, maybe from the ball and roller bearings? Anyway after fresh oil the snick, snick shifting didn't even last 500 miles, and the oil was black within 200. It also used oil especially at hwy speed so KLR riders generally carried a bottle along.
The primitive counterbalancer chain tensioner was a known problem with the spring, tensioner arm, or both prone to fail. The way counterbalancer chain slack is taken up was to slightly slacken the bolt (on the outside of the case) which went inside clamping the tensioner in place. Doing so enabled the spring to pull the tensioner to take up the slack, then you snugged the bolt back down which held it there. I started to do this on my 1998 but decided not to and instead wait for the aftermarket upgraded tensioner and spring I had on order. Thank God I did because when I opened the case the spring had broken with a section dangling on the tensioner and the other end nowhere to be seen (it later showed up when draining the oil). Had I slackened the tensioner bolt the tensioner would have just fallen down off the chain, and after I snugged the bolt back would have been set there. Starting the engine would have the chain spinning off the sprocket trashing the motor.

I later switched to Suzuki DR650's for my cheap, light weight adventure bike. The Suzuki did not come as well equipped for touring, like the KLR did with its 6 gallon tank, luggage rack, skid plate, and decent flat seat. So I had to spend some on those upgrades. But the build quality between the KLR and DR was night and day, everything from wiring, switches, frame and suspension rigidity, to the engine and gearbox was nicer. The DR engine is air/oil cooled so it does away with the radiator, the KLR's problematic thermostat, and associated plumbing. Also the counterbalancer is gear driven and the engine just sounds better. The two DR's I owned used ZERO oil and shifting didn't even start to deteriorate until 2,500 miles or so. My longest trip between oil change was 5,035 miles when I road it from Phoenix over to Cali for a week, up into Oregon, then back to Phoenix. Over that trip the oil level never budged and it came out looking almost like new after I returned and drained it.

Why Kawasaki brought back this crappy antique is a head scratcher? And why Suzuki doesn't update their DR650 with a few things like FI, a 5+ gallon tank, and just a bit of fairing is equally a head scratcher.
 
The "new" iteration of the venerable Kawasaki KLR650.

I'm really surprised they didn't raid their parts bin and utilise a 650 parallel twin (a la ER6 / Versys). :nenau

I suppose they didn't wan't to be seen to produce a Yamaha T7 clone, yet compete in this market sector with prospective owners viewing the KLR legacy through rose-tinted spectacles and the competitive pricing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTXeJPhdMqw
 
Back around 15 years ago when Kaw introduced their new 650 Ninja I felt they'd utilize that new parallel twin for other bikes with the next version of it around 2008 in an all new KLR650..... but nope. They've since brought various bikes utilizing that drivetrain from various sport bikes to naked bikes but never did what they should have. Now that 650 engine is long in the tooth especially compared to Yamaha's CP2 700 motor. I think Kaw must have thought do we bring out an all new KLR twin based off our old 650 motor/transmission which won't be nearly as nice as the T700? Or just dust off the antique, made in Thailand, cheap 36 hp KLR, give it FI and a better doohicky, and put it out there to compete with the RE Himalayan which it can? We get choice #2 and some will be content with one.
 
Back around 15 years ago when Kaw introduced their new 650 Ninja I felt they'd utilize that new parallel twin for other bikes with the next version of it around 2008 in an all new KLR650..... but nope. They've since brought various bikes utilizing that drivetrain from various sport bikes to naked bikes but never did what they should have. Now that 650 engine is long in the tooth especially compared to Yamaha's CP2 700 motor. I think Kaw must have thought do we bring out an all new KLR twin based off our old 650 motor/transmission which won't be nearly as nice as the T700? Or just dust off the antique, made in Thailand, cheap 36 hp KLR, give it FI and a better doohicky, and put it out there to compete with the RE Himalayan which it can? We get choice #2 and some will be content with one.

I think you have summed it up perfectly with regards to competing with the Himalayan; simple straight forward biking; fixable and cheap to run without mullering yer pocket. I must say; i was expecting something with the twin engine; but i can understand them taking the route they have.:beerjug:
 


Back
Top Bottom