Wilsons Sandbox

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 11:11 am**

First of all let me introduce myself - I'm Ted Fulmer, of Coppell, Texas (a Dallas suburb) and I've been lurking for some time(I just checked my archives - I've been on since april of this year, with a couple of stints in 2000 and 1999 as well.. I hope what I'm about to write is not viewed as negative - I'm sincere in my hope that a klr650 is the answer to "what's my next bike?". I drove down to Conroe Texas (approx 200 miles) to test ride a 1999 KLR650 that a dealership there had taken in on trade. I had been in phone contact with the dealership that had this bike a couple of times last week, and then asked a friend to stop by and check it out for me. He emailed that he'd seen it Friday at lunch and that it was a pretty good example of the year/mileage/model. At the very *last* minute saturday a.m., I decided to drive down to Conroe and test ride it. I had not been on a klr for some time (I think the last one I rode was in 1997), but I did sell my Honda NX250 just last August (stupid, stupid, stupid!), so that was my comparison. I rode the bike on various streets around the dealership (even found a vacant lot and tried some dirt) and pulled back to the dealership unconvinced. Compared to the nx250, this bike was taller (good) and more powerful (good), but "looser" (bad). By looser I mean that there were more rattles, squeeks, and vibration on this 2 (almost 3) year old bike than on my 10 year old nx250. Is this Honda vs Kawasaki engineering? ...or manufacturing? Or is this particular bike just in need of some TLC. I don't know, but I wasn't convinced. I pulled into the parking lot, and then decided to go around the block one more time, hoping to be "won over". It didn't happen. I felt like it was a good deal ($$$ wise), but I asked myself "how would I feel if I called back next week and someone else had bought it?" and the answer was "not so bad", so I passed. After I got home I've thought about that bike some more. I still might convince myself to buy it, but it certainly wasn't "love at first ride". I'd be curious on feedback - offlist or on-list as you deem appropriate. Ted Fulmer 82 V45S "Scarlett" - 82 V45S "Rip" - 85 V30F "???" - 84 V45C - "Bevo" Optimizing the balance between employment and motorcycle riding since 2/96.

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 11:33 am**

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., Ted Fulmer wrote:

> Compared to the nx250, this bike was taller (good) and more powerful > (good), but "looser" (bad). By looser I mean that there were more

rattles,

> squeeks, and vibration on this 2 (almost 3) year old bike than on

my 10

> year old nx250. Is this Honda vs Kawasaki engineering? ...or > manufacturing?

Your observation regarding the quality of Kawasaki vs. Honda has some merit as I see it first hand between a Honda and Kawasaki in my garage and have heard the same thought on other lists. I have a 6 year old Honda that has more miles than my 2 year old Kawasaki. The Kawi sounds like a rattle trap where the Honda is still solid and quiet. Gino

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 12:20 pm**

> I don't know, but I wasn't convinced. I pulled into the > parking lot, and then decided to go around the block one more > time, hoping to be "won over". It didn't happen. I felt like > it was a good deal ($$$ wise), but I asked myself "how would > I feel if I called back next week and someone else had bought > it?" and the answer was "not so bad", so I passed. > > After I got home I've thought about that bike some more. I > still might convince myself to buy it, but it certainly > wasn't "love at first ride".

Ted, no one can answer this one for you. You have to be the judge. I've never ridden any of the new bikes I've purchased. I ride the used ones only to ensure the basics of the bike are as advertised. The reason is I've never liked any bike I've just bought. It is only after I've committed myself to it and begun a selective process of asking myself what I like and what I don't and making investments in aftermarket equipment that it comes into its own. Using this method I've come to like every bike I've purchased. Some more than others. Some respond better to this approach. My '69 Sportster felt like a tractor the first 500 miles. By the time I was done I loved that bike and it fit me like a glove. No bike has ever responded better than my '96 DR650SE, it is unbelievable how it has shaped up. The Moto-Guzzi Quota felt better and better with each mile. Etc. The KLR is best in its class without question IMO. There just isn't any bike that can do as many things as it can adequately or better. At the same time, there are bikes than can do any one of the many things it does and can do them far better. You have to be the judge... Kurt

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 12:29 pm**

-----Original Message----- From: Ted Fulmer To: DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 13, 2001 1:12 PM

> there were more rattles, >squeeks, and vibration on this 2 (almost 3) year old bike than on my 10 >year old nx250. Is this Honda vs Kawasaki engineering? ...or >manufacturing? > > I still might >convince myself to buy it, but it certainly wasn't "love at first ride". > >I'd be curious on feedback - offlist or on-list as you deem appropriate. > >Ted Fulmer

When I first saw the KLR back in 1988 I didn't like them either. I was a Honda XL owner, and I felt the KLR was top heavy and 'junky' looking. As to your 'looser' comment, your right. Mine makes more noise than a hand full of steel bolts in a fire bucket but this never seems to effect performance. After owning two KLR's in the past few years and living in Labrador, where a dual-purpose motorcycle is the only logical choice; I can honestly say I wouldn't own anything else. Cheers, Steve

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 12:35 pm**

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:11:38 -0500 (CDT), Ted Fulmer wrote:

> First of all let me introduce myself - I'm Ted Fulmer, of Coppell, Texas > (a Dallas suburb) and I've been lurking for some time(I just checked my > archives - I've been on since april of this year, with a couple of stints > in 2000 and 1999 as well.. I hope what I'm about to write is not viewed

as

> negative - I'm sincere in my hope that a klr650 is the answer to "what's > my next bike?". > > I drove down to Conroe Texas (approx 200 miles) to test ride a 1999

KLR650

> that a dealership there had taken in on trade. > > I had been in phone contact with the dealership that had this bike a > couple of times last week, and then asked a friend to stop by and > check it out for me. > > He emailed that he'd seen it Friday at lunch and that it was a pretty

good

> example of the year/mileage/model. > > At the very *last* minute saturday a.m., I decided to drive down to

Conroe

> and test ride it. I had not been on a klr for some time (I think the last > one I rode was in 1997), but I did sell my Honda NX250 just last August > (stupid, stupid, stupid!), so that was my comparison. I rode the bike on > various streets around the dealership (even found a vacant lot and tried > some dirt) and pulled back to the dealership unconvinced. > > Compared to the nx250, this bike was taller (good) and more powerful > (good), but "looser" (bad). By looser I mean that there were more

rattles,

> squeeks, and vibration on this 2 (almost 3) year old bike than on my 10 > year old nx250. Is this Honda vs Kawasaki engineering? ...or > manufacturing? Or is this particular bike just in need of some TLC. > > I don't know, but I wasn't convinced. I pulled into the parking lot, and > then decided to go around the block one more time, hoping to be "won > over". It didn't happen. I felt like it was a good deal ($$$ wise), but I > asked myself "how would I feel if I called back next week and someone

else

> had bought it?" and the answer was "not so bad", so I passed. > > After I got home I've thought about that bike some more. I still might > convince myself to buy it, but it certainly wasn't "love at first ride". > > I'd be curious on feedback - offlist or on-list as you deem appropriate. > > Ted Fulmer > 82 V45S "Scarlett" - 82 V45S "Rip" - 85 V30F "???" - 84 V45C - "Bevo" > Optimizing the balance between employment and motorcycle riding since

2/96.

> > Ted,

I, too, tried one out at a dealer here in Hawaii. A repossesed '98 not well cared for, low miles. Just took it down to an old airport strip nearby and rode around a few times. My impressions were: Wow, lots of torque! Felt kinda like being on a big horse that just wanted to go. Not overly impressed, and didn't consider it.

> >Few months later(March 2000) was in San Antonio visiting family and noticed

ad in paper that local Kawasaki dealer had new '99's for sale for $4300. Bought one and I've been nothing but happy about it since. Later that year did a trip to Big Bend, and then last Dec rode all the way to Yavisa, Panama and back. Nothing but positives to say about bike and trip. Totally dependable, takes a lickin'-keeps on tickin', Mexican bus passin', pothole jumpin', tope vaultin', stream crossin' hell of a bike.---PHW

> >

_______________________________________________________ Send a cool gift with your E-Card http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 1:43 pm**

on 8/13/01 5:19 PM, Kurt Simpson at editor@... wrote:

>> I don't know, but I wasn't convinced. I pulled into the >> parking lot, and then decided to go around the block one more >> time, hoping to be "won over". It didn't happen. I felt like >> it was a good deal ($$$ wise), but I asked myself "how would >> I feel if I called back next week and someone else had bought >> it?" and the answer was "not so bad", so I passed. >> >> After I got home I've thought about that bike some more. I >> still might convince myself to buy it, but it certainly >> wasn't "love at first ride". > > > Ted, no one can answer this one for you. You have to be the judge. I've > never ridden any of the new bikes I've purchased. I ride the used ones > only to ensure the basics of the bike are as advertised. The reason is > I've never liked any bike I've just bought. It is only after I've > committed myself to it and begun a selective process of asking myself > what I like and what I don't and making investments in aftermarket > equipment that it comes into its own. Using this method I've come to > like every bike I've purchased. Some more than others. Some respond > better to this approach. > > My '69 Sportster felt like a tractor the first 500 miles. By the time I > was done I loved that bike and it fit me like a glove. No bike has ever > responded better than my '96 DR650SE, it is unbelievable how it has > shaped up. The Moto-Guzzi Quota felt better and better with each mile. > Etc. The KLR is best in its class without question IMO. There just isn't > any bike that can do as many things as it can adequately or better. At > the same time, there are bikes than can do any one of the many things it > does and can do them far better. > > You have to be the judge... > > Kurt >

Good write, Kurt! The key to it is, don't let someone else choose your bike! -- bierdo

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 2:23 pm**

i definitely also agree that hondas are "tighter" in all respects. but i likewise agree that the rattletrap that is my klr doesn't seem ot be affected by it at all. it's taken quite a beating without much complaining. i loved it when i first rode it. i loved it even more after a few rides, and i can honestly say i love it equally three years and 30k miles later, every time i ride it. "the swiss army knife of motorcycles" (not my quote). _pete _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 4:34 pm**

back in '90, when I bought by KLR, I also owned an '84 XR250 and an '84 XL350. (and an '84 XR100 for my little brother - no, I didn't buy them all at once

I mirror your sentiments about fit and finish, the KLR doesn't come close to the Hondas. On the other hand, I only own one bike now, the same '90 KLR I bought way back when. the KLRs are a little clunky, they rattle, they just don't fit me as well as any Honda I ever owned (and I've owned a few of 'em) and they do seem to have some quality-control problems (I've had one stupid/serious problem with my bike and I've heard of a few other odd things) but, like people have already said, the KLRs can do just about anything. And they're damm tought - the one serious problem I had still let me ride home. Oh, and fixing it involved the ONLY $5 motorcycle part I've ever bought. Only $5, I've paid more than that for a Honda bolt! the KLRs are, in my opinion, the best comprimise bike going. I went from, at one point, 5 bikes down to one and I'm still happy - and with a lot more garage space. Would I buy a new one -- no, my old one is still trucking along fine, if I zigged instead of zagged and wound up needing a new bike, well it would be a choice between a new KLR or maybe that new water-cooled street-legal XR thing... old habbits die hard. David... A4 Victoria BC Canada

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., Ted Fulmer wrote: > First of all let me introduce myself - I'm Ted Fulmer, of Coppell, Texas > (a Dallas suburb) and I've been lurking for some time(I just checked my > archives - I've been on since april of this year, with a couple of stints > in 2000 and 1999 as well.. I hope what I'm about to write is not viewed as > negative - I'm sincere in my hope that a klr650 is the answer to "what's > my next bike?". > > I drove down to Conroe Texas (approx 200 miles) to test ride a 1999 KLR650 > that a dealership there had taken in on trade. > > I had been in phone contact with the dealership that had this bike a > couple of times last week, and then asked a friend to stop by and > check it out for me. > > He emailed that he'd seen it Friday at lunch and that it was a pretty good > example of the year/mileage/model. > > At the very *last* minute saturday a.m., I decided to drive down to Conroe > and test ride it. I had not been on a klr for some time (I think the last > one I rode was in 1997), but I did sell my Honda NX250 just last August > (stupid, stupid, stupid!), so that was my comparison. I rode the bike on > various streets around the dealership (even found a vacant lot and tried > some dirt) and pulled back to the dealership unconvinced. > > Compared to the nx250, this bike was taller (good) and more powerful > (good), but "looser" (bad). By looser I mean that there were more rattles, > squeeks, and vibration on this 2 (almost 3) year old bike than on my 10 > year old nx250. Is this Honda vs Kawasaki engineering? ...or > manufacturing? Or is this particular bike just in need of some TLC. > > I don't know, but I wasn't convinced. I pulled into the parking lot, and > then decided to go around the block one more time, hoping to be "won > over". It didn't happen. I felt like it was a good deal ($$$ wise), but I > asked myself "how would I feel if I called back next week and someone else > had bought it?" and the answer was "not so bad", so I passed. > > After I got home I've thought about that bike some more. I still might > convince myself to buy it, but it certainly wasn't "love at first ride". > > I'd be curious on feedback - offlist or on-list as you deem appropriate. > > Ted Fulmer > 82 V45S "Scarlett" - 82 V45S "Rip" - 85 V30F "???" - 84 V45C - "Bevo" > Optimizing the balance between employment and motorcycle riding since 2/96.

Posted: **Mon Aug 13, 2001 5:21 pm**

I purchased my '97 KLR without a test ride (they are pretty hard to come by for new bikes). When I rode away from the dealership my initial reaction was something like, "This feels like a John Deer". It is not a bike that makes a good first impression but I can honestly say that I have never regretted purchasing it (and I probably do a lot less dirt riding than most listers). By the way, I went on a camping trip through northern Quebec and Ontario recently with some buddies. There was a ZX9, two VFRs and of course, me on my KLR. We took a little used backroad at one point with some serious twisties. I am pleased to report that I kicked all of their asses without really pushing the KLR very much at all. It is a terrific street bike. John in T.O.

Posted: **Fri Aug 17, 2001 12:11 pm**

I've run the D606 on the rear with the discontinued K139 on the front. It's a knobly combo on the street and adds noticeable vibration to the ride, but they hook up great in the dirt. I'll be using that combo in Utah this fall. Will have to take it easy on those swoopy turns on Highway 12, but won't be worrying about dirt, sand, or mud on all those wonderful back roads. I think the MT21's are easier to live with on the street and still offer good off-road grip. __Arden Kysely A11 "Mr. K"

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., guymanbro@e... wrote: > --- In DSN_klr650@y..., k650dsn@a... wrote: > > --- In DSN_klr650@y..., Devon Jarvis wrote: > > > Has anybody used these tires? What do you think? They seem to > have a slightly more agressive tread, and deeper knobs than the K750 > stocktires. Spent 2 hours at an OHV park which is 100mi from home, > I'll be wearing out the stock tires sooner rather than later. The > back will be lucky to see 4000mi. > > > > > > Devon > > > Yo Devon, the D606s have been described as more aggressive than the > MT21 (which you might have seen on my KLR when we went to the > Desert). They also wear quickly on pavement. Street manners weren't > highly praised. I love my MT21s but I might just have to try the > Kenda K670s that someone mentioned for the price. > > dat brooklyn bum

Wilsons Sandbox

dunlop d606?

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

newbie's reaction to a klr testride

dunlop d606?