It's true that the WeeStrom is no match for the KLR in the dirt. But the
WeeStrom is an OK logging road bike, especially if it appropriately farkled.
I have 52K miles on my KLR and 20K on my Wee so feel qualified to compare
and contrast the two bikes.
I do a week long fly-fishing trip every year to the Boulder River in
Montana. I usually take the KLR and take a few days to get there from
Seattle, camping on the way and hitting some interesting dirt on the way
there and back. I avoid the interstate at all cost, especially the Montana
portion where the traffic pace is many miles faster than the 75 mph speed
limit.
But last year my fishing trip was boxed in by work travel. I could do the
trip but needed to get there in a day and back in a day. Rather than a
leisurely trip on the KLR I ran the entire 800 miles in a day on the Wee.
Most of the trip was on I-90, the Montana portion of which was run at speeds
that would not have been comfortable on the KLR. The last 50 miles were
rough logging roads eroded and rutted by huge 8-horse trailers. The Wee
did fine on these road. I ran these 50 rough miles a lot slower than I
would have run them on the KLR, out of deference to the relatively fragile
cast wheels and the street-biased tires on the Wee. I didn't bottom the
suspension but tested the (aftermarket) skid plate a few times on the rocky
and rutted road.
I ran the 1500 miles of slab there and back a whole lot more comfortably on
the Wee that I could have run them on the KLR. If the KLR is a 50-50 dual
sport (street-dirt) then my well farkled Wee is a 80-20 (street-dirt) dual
sport. Its capable of much more dirt that one might think. I saw a Wee go
over Mengel Pass in Death Valley and that pass is a challenge for KLRs, I
love the Wee, it has displaced my KLR as my commuting bike.
But if I had to get down to a single bike in the garage it would be the KLR
that stayed. It's not as good at any type of riding as other bikes in my
fleet. But it does everything tolerably well, a claim that I cannot make
about any of my more specialized mounts.
From:
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Spike55
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2008 05:39
To:
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Re: suspension upgrades for pavement
I agree that the VStrom is no KLR in the rough stuff. My buddy runs
a Michelin Anakee front tire and a Metzler Tourance rear (both better
road tires than dirt tires), I run MEFO Explorer Sport 99 f/r. I
have my KLR geared lower than OEM so I don't need to slip the clutch
that much when slower speeds are required. My KLR probably has 2x -
3x more suspension travel than his VStrom and I can stay seated while
manuveuring through the wash-outs and rocks but he has to stand and
sometimes bangs his add-on skid plate where I rarely do.
My original comments aren't meant to compare / contrast the KLR /
VStrom (they are different bikes for different situations), to me the
original author, mptadam, had a whole list of upgrades, and then said
he was going to sell the KLR in approx 5 months for the more road
oriented bike. It just seemed odd to me to spend all of those HRS /
$$$ on a bike you're not keeping but maybe we aren't getting the
whole story.
Don R100, A6F
--- In
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com ,
David Bell wrote:
>
> My neighbor has the 650 VStrom and I have ridden it for 30-40 miles
on road. It is amazingly good on the road for what it is. I usually
ride a BMW RT and it's certainly not an RT, but it is more road
oriented than the KLR by far. I am considering one in my future but
would not take it to some of the KLR roads I've taken.
>
> db
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Spike55
> To:
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 9:30:44 AM
> Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Re: suspension upgrades for pavement
>
>
> A buddy of mine has the 650 Suzuki V-Strum (the 1000s are too big)
> and I'd say it is a 70/30% - 80/20% road/dirt bike, which sounds
like
> the direction you seem to be leaning. I can't keep up with him on
> gravel roads (better than me) and I can't keep up with him on hard
> roads (crazier than me) but that bike works well for him. He does
> 15,000 miles a year (retired and has 50K on it now) and he takes
> trips from Pennsylvania to Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, as well
as
> up and down the east coast. Its not an expensive bike either, a
good
> performer with the two-cyl design, and only had one major repair
that
> required the dealer.
>
> With only 4-5 months to go before summer 2009 and that is when you
> want to change bikes anyway, why spend a dime on the KLR and then
> sell it? Yes, I'd change oil/filter and keep air in the tires. Is
> it going to stay in the family?
>
> Don R100, A6F
>
> --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogro ups.com, "mptadam" wrote:
> >
> > I'm ready to put a little money into the suspension, a little. My
> plan is to get the heavy spring
> > from Top Gun, but I'm unsure if I should spend the money on
> progressive springs for the
> > forks, cartridge emulators, or just heavier fork oil for the
front.
> I don't think I'll be keeping
> > the KLR for years and years, honestly I'll likely trade it for
> something more street oriented
> > next summer. I haven't made it to the dirt yet, and when I do, it
> won't be much more then
> > some high desert riding or some wide, graded trail riding.
> >
> > I don't need the Moab rear shock, and I don't know if the
cartridge
> emulators, or even the
> > progressive fork springs for that matter will be a worthwhile
> investment if I sell the bike
> > within a year. I'm 250 plus gear, and I'd like to put my wife on
> the back, who is a much more
> > manageable weight
I just don't want to bottom out riding over
> the lane markers.
> >
> > I know I'm already undersprung in the back, just looking for
some
> advice on how deep I
> > should go into the fork. Corbin seat, doohickey, fresh tires, new
> chain and sprockets, valves
> > and subframe bolt are handled or in the process of being...It'll
be
> a nice bike ready to farkle
> > for someone, but I'd like to tune the front a little closer to
the
> rear suspension after I get the
> > spring in.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]