Which of these three bikes would make the best...

[ReSTored]

Forum Sponsor

How about Suzuki DR650 ?

I was thinking the same thing, older technology, inexpensive to purchase and run. easy to work on. With a different set of tires it would do commuting OK and still have decent dirt road / off road capability.

I'm thinking of getting one for the cottage to enable me to explore back roads, fire roads etc...... Something my 750 lb. ST is definitely not suited for.

 

[Mad Mike]

KLR650. You say some trails could get rough. Buy the KLR as it's hard to kill and easy to fix. It'll do everything on your list.

KLR and DR650 are certainly proven, but they are bigger, a bit slothish on the road and not as nimble on the trail.

The DR400 is a decade newer and probably better than the 650s all around.

from what I have read, RE Hymilayans could also fit the bill, apparently tough buggers off road.

 

[bigpoppa]

KLR and DR650 are certainly proven, but they are bigger, a bit slothish on the road and not as nimble on the trail.

The DR400 is a decade newer and probably better than the 650s all around.

from what I have read, RE Hymilayans could also fit the bill, apparently tough buggers off road.

would the drz really be better on the road/highway than the 650s?

 

[Mad Mike]

would the drz really be better on the road/highway than the 650s?

I think so. Have about the same power, more compact, less vibrations from the 400. The 650s have a bit more down low grunt, but no real power advantage on the hwy.

the 400 is also 10 years newer, and for a few bucks a pipe, carb and tune uncorks 10hp on a dr400.

 

[TK4]

I think so. Have about the same power, more compact, less vibrations from the 400. The 650s have a bit more down low grunt, but no real power advantage on the hwy.

the 400 is also 10 years newer, and for a few bucks a pipe, carb and tune uncorks 10hp on a dr400.

Small gas tank = limited range unless you put on an IMS replacement. Then it'll weigh pretty close to the 650s.
Also, the seat sux. For urban assault it'd be fine, but commuting not so much.

 

[Roadghost]

It's only a hundred and twelve pounds heavier then a DRZ400SM

Yeah and weight is a big factor off road - as much as clearance. I thank everyone for the input, went out today and took a really good look at all of the bikes (again) and went for the KTM 390 Adventure. I looked wistfully at the super-fantastic KTM 690 Enduro R as I made my purchase, I can tell you, it conjured up shades of my lost youth, but at $13,000 I could have bought two 390s.

-- The DRZ400, absolutely would hang the rest of off-road. No contest. But it's old carbureted design and low compression, meant comparatively poor fuel mileage and highway performance. A small tank meant my lazy backside would have had to refuel every day (likely in the AM when I'm late for work). I also would have been into too many mods to get it to where I wanted it.

-- The CB500Xa sat like a wallflower in the back of both dealerships as the salesmen all tried to sell me an $11,000 650 VStrom. It seemed no amount of convincing could get the guy off the VStrom push. At least I learned that the 650 VStrom is a measly 20lbs heavier than the CB500x lead sled. Comfy as the CB was and the best product support next to Harley Davidson, I just couldn't go for its 9 year old 430lbs wet Kawasaki Concours vintage design. I'd visions of disappearing somewhere in the back woods of Nova Scotia, trying to get the overweight thing out of a mud-bog, refusing to lose my 8 bucks.

-- Finally there was the KTM. Hopelessly low-slung for an off-road bike. In fact, off-roading with it is going to be more of a fantasy, if not a hilarious joke. But at its weight at least I'll have a fighting chance wrestling it out of that black peat quicksand we had to go through back in the day (well probably not, but if I bring my 6' 4" son I'll watch as he gets it out for me). Otherwise I can't argue with a 400km fuel tank, 326lbs dry weight, a standard bike riding position, lower insurance (I checked and it's the lowest of all three) and 70mpg and a state-of-the-art computerized display with a slew of confusing options. I bought the optional high windshield with it.

Not exactly what I wanted. Sort of like getting to 3rd base and getting c-blocked. But it's a nice little bike. Maybe when they come out with the 390 Enduro R in a couple of years I'll trade it in.

 

[bigpoppa]

Yeah and weight is a big factor off road - as much as clearance. I thank everyone for the input, went out today and took a really good look at all of the bikes (again) and went for the KTM 390 Adventure. I looked wistfully at the super-fantastic KTM 650 Enduro R as I made my purchase, I can tell you, it conjured up shades of my lost youth, but at $13,000 I could have bought two 390s.

-- The DRZ400, absolutely would hang the rest of off-road. No contest. But it's old carbureted design and low compression, meant comparatively poor fuel mileage and highway performance. A small tank meant my lazy backside would have had to refuel every day (likely in the AM when I'm late for work). I also would have been into too many mods to get it to where I wanted it.

-- The CB500Xa sat like a wallflower in the back of both dealerships as the salesmen all tried to sell me an $11,000 650 VStrom. It seemed no amount of convincing could get the guy off the VStrom push. At least I learned that the 650 VStrom is a measly 20lbs heavier than the CB500x lead sled. Comfy as the CB was and the best product support next to Harley Davidson, I just couldn't go for its 9 year old 430lbs wet Kawasaki Concours vintage design. I'd visions of disappearing somewhere in the back woods of Nova Scotia, trying to get the overweight thing out of a mud-bog, refusing to lose my 8 bucks.

-- Finally there was the KTM. Hopelessly low-slung for an off-road bike. In fact, off-roading with it is going to be more of a fantasy, if not a hilarious joke. But at its weight at least I'll have a fighting chance wrestling it out of that black peat quicksand we had to go through back in the day (well probably not, but if I bring my 6' 4" son I'll watch as he gets it out for me). Otherwise I can't argue with a 400km fuel tank, 326lbs dry weight, a standard bike riding position, lower insurance (I checked and it's the lowest of all three) and 70mpg and a state-of-the-art computerized display with a slew of confusing options. I bought the optional high windshield with it.

Not exactly what I wanted. Sort of like getting to 3rd base and getting c-blocked. But it's a nice little bike. Maybe when they come out with the 390 Enduro R in a couple of years I'll trade it in.

congrats!

were you stuck on new? There are a bunch of used 650 enduros out there at good prices

 

[Roadghost]

congrats!

were you stuck on new? There are a bunch of used 650 enduros out there at good prices

Yeah, given the complexity of the newer bikes I wanted the warranty. I saw a number of the 690s and figured fuel mileage wouldn't be up to snuff for me. But like I say, when the 390 Enduro R comes I will be moving that way.

 

[ToSlow]

Yeah, given the complexity of the newer bikes I wanted the warranty. I saw a number of the 650s and figured fuel mileage wouldn't be up to snuff for me. But like I say, when the 390 Enduro R comes I will be moving that way.

I’ve got a klr 650 and get around 400k’s to a tank

I went up a tooth on the front sprocket so hwy at 120kph is not a big deal

I’m sure you’ll enjoy the new bike congratulations

 

[Mad Mike]

Small gas tank = limited range unless you put on an IMS replacement. Then it'll weigh pretty close to the 650s.
Also, the seat sux. For urban assault it'd be fine, but commuting not so much.

I wouldn't worry too much about the tank size, they have a range of 280km when running hwy, 220km combined city/hwy, and about 150km pounding hard thru the dirt. That's a couple of hours in the seat, good enough unless you're mile munching.

As for the seat, the stock seat is thin and firm -- quite adequate for for dirt and short commutes, not what you want for hours in the saddle. The good news is Seat Concepts, Fisher, Sergeant (and probably more) offer all day touring seats for few hundred bucks -- they look more like the seat on a DL.

 

[Mad Mike]

Congrats! Looks like a well thought out pick. Lots of folks heading to KTM these days, can't wait to hear some follow-up rider reviews next season.

I'm a bit old school when it comes to tech, I guess that's why I like the DRs. Tech doesn't scare me - in fact I love what it delivers and you get lots on a KTM. I grew up fixing my own bikes, most of them with just the toolkit found under the seat. I still like bikes that retain basic simple to diagnose and repair systems, particularly on small bikes that get ridden hard. I get annoyed when manufacturers control service, upgrades and such through proprietary tools, non-existent factory manuals, and custom programming devices.

 

[Lightcycle]

690 Enduro R, not 650.

And yes, if that bike was on the shortlist, it would have been the #1 choice by a mile. People ride around the world with that bike, so commuting would not be a problem, and its off-road prowess is legendary.

Only problem is it would be in the shop all the time...

 

[bigpoppa]

690 Enduro R, not 650.

And yes, if that bike was on the shortlist, it would have been the #1 choice by a mile. People ride around the world with that bike, so commuting would not be a problem, and its off-road prowess is legendary.

Only problem is it would be in the shop all the time...

is it one of those with the oil changes measured in hours instead of thousands of kilometers?

 

[ifiddles]

2020 Suzuki DR-Z400SM

Decked in slicker rubber and differing suspension and brake setups, the DR-Z400SM turns Suzuki’s popular dual sport into a supermoto.

www.motorcyclistonline.com

 

[Roadghost]

690 Enduro R, not 650.

And yes, if that bike was on the shortlist, it would have been the #1 choice by a mile. People ride around the world with that bike, so commuting would not be a problem, and its off-road prowess is legendary.

Only problem is it would be in the shop all the time...

Yes, 690. Too many bike numbers to remember these days. I never really considered the 690 seriously because anything over 500 was not on the agenda for fuel mileage. I also believe that larger is heavier and heavier less desirable off-road, full stop. I could have bought a big ADV, but to me they're an industry con-job - hopelessly excessive.

The KTM reliability rumors concern me. That's why I went with a warrantied bike. If it doesn't work out, I'm back to Honda. I will not tolerate a motorcycle that has me sitting for weeks waiting for a part.

I think, given your history of riding you surely must recognize by now the limitations of large ADVs vs lightweight, nimble machines. There's guys doing the Arctic Circle with CBR125s. Not saying that's ideal, but the smaller bikes today are very powerful, lightweight and capable.

 

[Lightcycle]

is it one of those with the oil changes measured in hours instead of thousands of kilometers?

No, it's street-service intervals - 10K kms.

It's just the reliability, known issues like rocker arm bearings, electrical gremlins, etc. still persist. Anecdotally, on the RTW circuit, we saw many different bikes out on the road, BMW GSes, Suzuki DRs, Yamaha S10s (well one), KLRs, Super Sherpas and lots of 690s. If we were to pull into a hostel for the evening, we'd see most of the bikes would be parked and under cover, but there would invariably be a 690 owner tearing his bike apart in the courtyard trying to fix something or the other. This happened way too often for it to be a coincidence.

 

[Lightcycle]

I think, given your history of riding you surely must recognize by now the limitations of large ADVs vs lightweight, nimble machines. There's guys doing the Arctic Circle with CBR125s. Not saying that's ideal, but the smaller bikes today are very powerful, lightweight and capable.

Agreed.

But there's a tip-over point between light-weight and agility and the ability to haul everything you need for a long trip. Also, go too light and suffer things like fatigue from wind, road noise and vibrations, reduced range, reduced service intervals from an overly-tuned engine.

Every solution to these problems adds weight, and that tip-over point of weight vs long-distance rideability is going to vary from rider to rider. There is a small but significant club of Super Sherpas RTW riders. On the other end of the spectrum, I would estimate that there are more R1200GS RTW riders than any other model, despite it being such a pig. Maybe in that example, it's down to good marketing by Ewan and Charley more than anything.

The 690, specifically, is actually on the lighter end of the ADV bike spectrum. At 350 lbs wet, it's only 50 lbs heavier than the CBR125 in your example above and only 20 lbs heavier than the DRZ400SM. And what you gain for that additional weight makes for a lot of comfort and convenience on a very long trip, without sacrificing the ability to be adventurous. I think it's actually *the* sweet spot for an Adventure bike. Minus the reliability issues as per the last post.

But speaking on behalf of all the larger ADV bikes out there, at some point, the rider has made the decision that they want to carry a 3P tent vs a bivvy sack. They want to carry around a camp stove, multiple pots and pans & cooking utensils instead of eating one-pot meals over a candle-in-a-shoe-polish-can stove every night. They want a sleeping pad in addition to the sleeping bag. Nice to carry around some electronics and all the assorted power accessories when inside the tent for the evening. Hard panniers have built-in security over soft. etc. etc. etc

These may sound like extravagant luxuries and maybe they should just man-the-f-up and rough it. But for some riders, these little things (the riding comfort, being able to carry all the conveniences inside the panniers, the longer service intervals) will mean that the trip can keep going on for years and not weeks without succumbing to fatigue.

 

[bigpoppa]

Agreed.

But there's a tip-over point between light-weight and agility and the ability to haul everything you need for a long trip. Also, go too light and suffer things like fatigue from wind, road noise and vibrations, reduced range, reduced service intervals from an overly-tuned engine.

Every solution to these problems adds weight, and that tip-over point of weight vs long-distance rideability is going to vary from rider to rider. There is a small but significant club of Super Sherpas RTW riders. On the other end of the spectrum, I would estimate that there are more R1200GS RTW riders than any other model, despite it being such a pig. Maybe in that example, it's down to good marketing by Ewan and Charley more than anything.

The 690, specifically, is actually on the lighter end of the ADV bike spectrum. At 350 lbs wet, it's only 50 lbs heavier than the CBR125 in your example above and only 20 lbs heavier than the DRZ400SM. And what you gain for that additional weight makes for a lot of comfort and convenience on a very long trip, without sacrificing the ability to be adventurous. I think it's actually *the* sweet spot for an Adventure bike. Minus the reliability issues as per the last post.

But speaking on behalf of all the larger ADV bikes out there, at some point, the rider has made the decision that they want to carry a 3P tent vs a bivvy sack. They want to carry around a camp stove, multiple pots and pans & cooking utensils instead of eating one-pot meals over a candle-in-a-shoe-polish-can stove every night. They want a sleeping pad in addition to the sleeping bag. Nice to carry around some electronics and all the assorted power accessories when inside the tent for the evening. Hard panniers have built-in security over soft. etc. etc. etc

These may sound like extravagant luxuries and maybe they should just man-the-f-up and rough it. But for some riders, these little things (the riding comfort, being able to carry all the conveniences inside the panniers, the longer service intervals) will mean that the trip can keep going on for years and not weeks without succumbing to fatigue.

Was reading your blog and was intrigued by colombia, how much of the road is dirt vs smoothly paved?

I take it there is a reason they take adv bikes with ground clearance and knobbies instead of goldwings for rtw type stuff?

 

[Lightcycle]

Was reading your blog and was intrigued by colombia, how much of the road is dirt vs smoothly paved?

Depends on where you want to go. Most of the roads between the main cities are paved, but if you wanted to visit some of the smaller towns, then these would only be accessible by a gravel road. It's changing quickly though, the world is getting more and more paved. I remember the gnarliest road we did in Colombia was actually in the process of getting paved, we were riding past big construction vehicles back in 2013.

At that time, there were huge sections of the country to the east that were controlled by FARC guerillas. They eventually disarmed and became a political party in 2017, so today there would be lots more of the country to explore by motorcycle compared to when we were there.

One place we debated about visiting was Rainbow River. But we never did because it was in FARC-controlled territory at the time:



Despite that, we spent five months in Colombia, it was one of our favorite countries to visit.

I take it there is a reason they take adv bikes with ground clearance and knobbies instead of goldwings for rtw type stuff?

Yeah. Marketing.

Most of the populated world is paved, if not by asphalt then by hard-packed gravel. You don't need a R1200GS to ride gravel. In all of the broken roads in developing countries we've ridden through, the locals are all on 125cc Chinese motorcycles on street suspension and tires. And they're carrying a family of four on them.

I've read blogs of guys taking their low-clearance Harley Davidsons with street tires on RTW trips. Any road that a horse and cart can travel on is doable by any kind of motorcycle. Just that some do it more comfortably than others.

The theory is that what you're gaining by getting a bike with longer suspension travel, higher ground clearance, upright seating position, grippy tires, armor in all the right places is the ability to explore all the nooks and crannies and areas past the end-points of civilization. Where the gravel roads end and the areas that are accessible by horse+cart become only accessible by horse. And you have to make a real effort to find roads like these, because they won't be on any map.

The reality and the problem with the adventure bike market today is that it delivers all of the above at the expense of weight. Outfitted with all of the off-road bells and whistles, can these bikes go on roads accessible by horse? Nope. Too heavy now.

My opinion is that 95% of all adventure travel is doable on almost any kind of motorcycle. You can take a Harley up the Dalton Highway in Alaska and the Carretera Austral in Chile. But the street suspension will have you bouncing all over the place, the smooth tires will having you sliding in the mud and the feet-forward position won't allow you to move your body weight so you're making the best use of traction and balance. The ADV bike just makes it more comfortable to do it on.

Because of the bikes we've got right now, I've been transitioning from watching shows like Long Way Round/Down/Up/Sideways/etc to shows like these:

Roads not on maps. Roads where you probably couldn't take a Harley through. Or a R1200GS, for that matter...

 

[Chiapet]

I don't see anything on your list that looks like fun


Sent from my moto g(8) plus using Tapatalk

Forum Sponsor