weight loss program/land access

[Blake]

I've posted several replies around this subject over the past two days, but I've seen only one actually show up in the list. Am I doing something wrong technically, or are my replies being "moderated?" In any event, I'm going to weigh in on this again. I own both a KLR (A14) and a 2003 KTM 640 Adventure. I like the KLR a lot. If it's a great bike for you, then good. For those who think the KTM is a nice bike if 1. You can keep it running, 2. You can find parts, 3. You can afford parts, 4. You can keep up with the maintenance, 5. You can handle its horrible seat and epic vibration, let me say this. It is quite reliable, thank you. Parts are readily available, and quickly becoming as available as OEM parts for the Kawi. The parts and service are quite reasonable. For those who think otherwise, you're probably making assumptions based on the fact that it's a Euro bike and it's purchase price is higher. I own the KTM and Kawi, plus a BMW and an Aprilia. I know cheap, reasonable, and expensive. The KTM and Kawi are VERY similar in maintenance and parts costs. I think maintenance on the KTM is easier than the Kawi. How many of you have never checked your valves because of the complexity? The KTM is easy in that regard. Only the oil changes are complex on the KTM, but only compared to the Kawi. The KTM is very easy to keep on the road. The KTM race bikes ARE maintenance intensive, but they are race bikes. The comfort of the '03 seat is quite good on the KTM, and better than my Kawi. The KTM vibes more, and always will, but it smoothes out considerably with proper jetting and a few miles of break in. The KLR will always be smoother, but it will never have the power, suspension, etc. of the KTM. Summary: Both bikes are good. If you like offroad, you'll need to do a lot of work to make the KLR about half as good as the KTM is right out of the box. If you like mostly long highway miles, get the KLR. If you want a sporty street bike and VERY capable dirt/rally machine, there is NO substitute for the Katoom. Most importantly, the fears about the KTM are JUST PLAIN WRONG, and are based on experiences from a few years ago, experiences regarding KTM race bikes, or one bad situation that is incorrectly applied universally. If someone said the KLR was supremely unreliable based on the fact that the balancer adjuster is prone to failure, is that a fact? YES. Is it as big a deal as some make it out? NO, because it's easily addressable. The KLR is good, but the KTM is magical. This from someone who owns both, and does like the KLR.

[Mark Sampson]

Nicely put Blake, Mark Sampson www.bigdogadventures.com I've posted several replies around this subject over the past two days, but I've seen only one actually show up in the list. Am I doing something wrong technically, or are my replies being "moderated?" In any event, I'm going to weigh in on this again. I own both a KLR (A14) and a 2003 KTM 640 Adventure. I like the KLR a lot. If it's a great bike for you, then good. For those who think the KTM is a nice bike if 1. You can keep it running, 2. You can find parts, 3. You can afford parts, 4. You can keep up with the maintenance, 5. You can handle its horrible seat and epic vibration, let me say this. It is quite reliable, thank you. Parts are readily available, and quickly becoming as available as OEM parts for the Kawi. The parts and service are quite reasonable. For those who think otherwise, you're probably making assumptions based on the fact that it's a Euro bike and it's purchase price is higher. I own the KTM and Kawi, plus a BMW and an Aprilia. I know cheap, reasonable, and expensive. The KTM and Kawi are VERY similar in maintenance and parts costs. I think maintenance on the KTM is easier than the Kawi. How many of you have never checked your valves because of the complexity? The KTM is easy in that regard. Only the oil changes are complex on the KTM, but only compared to the Kawi. The KTM is very easy to keep on the road. The KTM race bikes ARE maintenance intensive, but they are race bikes. The comfort of the '03 seat is quite good on the KTM, and better than my Kawi. The KTM vibes more, and always will, but it smoothes out considerably with proper jetting and a few miles of break in. The KLR will always be smoother, but it will never have the power, suspension, etc. of the KTM. Summary: Both bikes are good. If you like offroad, you'll need to do a lot of work to make the KLR about half as good as the KTM is right out of the box. If you like mostly long highway miles, get the KLR. If you want a sporty street bike and VERY capable dirt/rally machine, there is NO substitute for the Katoom. Most importantly, the fears about the KTM are JUST PLAIN WRONG, and are based on experiences from a few years ago, experiences regarding KTM race bikes, or one bad situation that is incorrectly applied universally. If someone said the KLR was supremely unreliable based on the fact that the balancer adjuster is prone to failure, is that a fact? YES. Is it as big a deal as some make it out? NO, because it's easily addressable. The KLR is good, but the KTM is magical. This from someone who owns both, and does like the KLR. List sponsored by Dual Sport News at www.dualsportnews.com. List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html Unsubscribe by sending a blank message to: DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com . Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Arden Kysely]

--- In DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com, "Blake" wrote:

> I've posted several replies around this subject over the past two > days, but I've seen only one actually show up in the list. Am I > doing something wrong technically, or are my replies > being "moderated?"

If you're replying from the internet site, don't forget to click the drop-down box for the address and select DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com. The address defaults to that of the sender to which you are replying. __Arden

[bigfatgreenbike]

ttcarey1@... wrote:

>Hey, appreciate the pics...drooling a little over the fork. I've >done just about everything to mine except some kind of non-OEM fork, >and no luggage stuff included. Yeah, looks like you've gone over the >bike pretty extensively. Also like your "character" kisses on the >gas tank. Ever used an aftermarket fuel tank? >

I am constantly tempted to buy the military tank. But I occasionally snag brush that tears the shrouds off (I carry a lot of zip-ties with me), and I worry about what would happen if they didn't give. I also envision the bike sliding down the highway at 60mph, and the low corner of the tank grinding clear through after 50ft or so of sliding across pavement. And unlike steel, the polyethylene (or is it polypropylene?) tank pretty much precludes a quicksteel repair. Maybe the Acerbis tank, or the IMS tank that retains the stock shrouds, would work. But the appearance doesn't bother me, and I wonder how much lighter the plastic tank really is.

>I had a large Acerbis >for many years on my '88, and it's still on there with no problems. >I went with an IMS on this A15 I recently got. Maybe it's just all >the real off road bikes I've had over the years, but I'm quite >partial to plastic tanks. >

I'm partial to magnetic tankbags though. I'll replace the tank when it's necesary, and (knock on wood) that might be never.

>How did you post pics in your message like >that? >

That's the address of a computer at work. Very easy, but anytime the computer has to be shut off or restarted then they're not accessible. Also the first things to get deleted if I need room. But less hassle for everyone than a photo hosting service where you have to sign up. If you are using Mac OS 10 and have an always-on internet connection, it's easy. -- Devon Brooklyn, NY A15-Z '01 KLR650 '81 SR500 cafe racer "The truth's not too popular these days....." Arnold Schwarzenneger, in The Running Man