my oil burning problem......what?

[John Biccum]

Here is the weight of the stocker and the Schnitz 685 piston: http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#!i=49977402 http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#!i=49977402&k=axpdH> &k=axpdH JE s claimed weight confirmed with an appropriate scale, I weighed the (new OEM replacement) piston on the same scale. My (pre-production) 685 piston was not Moly-coated like the production 685s pistons are but I don t think that coating weighs anything worth mentioning. From: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of RobertWichert Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 7:08 AM To: Jeff Saline Cc: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. Jeff, 70 g is significant. If you know the weight of the stock piston, please enlighten (HA!) me. Percentage change would be nice to know, but 70 g is certainly a benefit. If that better matches the balancer, then there you go! I have been told (I forget who said it) that you should always "use the thinnest gasket to get the highest compression to see the most gains". This is perfectly reasonable. If you look at the difference in displacement, 685/650, it's about 5% larger. Since there aren 't larger valves (there aren't are there?) and no porting is involved (there isn't, right?) and the redline doesn't go up, the HP is going to go up by 5%. 5% may be something you can feel, just maybe. Let's say the KLR is 40 HP stock, for argument. A 5% increase is 2 HP. Can you feel 2 HP? Yeah, maybe a little, but maybe not. It will be less at lower RPM, so any "it's the mid range where you really feel it" isn't going to make sense given the inputs. At mid range it's going to be 1 HP, maybe, and probably not enough to notice. Torque is HP divided by RPM, so getting more torque with more displacement is a given, but the torque curve isn't going to change unless you change the cam, the valves, the airbox (stock is probably higher midrange torque), or the exhaust (stock is probably higher midrange torque). So any idea that "midrange torque is much better" is also probably not going to match the inputs. 5% is all you are going to get with just displacement. Compression could increase that 2 HP to 5 HP, maybe. That's enough to feel, I think. You can play around with that here: http://www.bgsoflex.com/crchange.html . Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 4/4/2012 9:31 PM, Jeff Saline wrote: > On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 21:00:57 -0700 RobertWichert > > writes: >> Some have said the increase in compression when doing the 685 made >> most of the power difference. That makes tremendous sense. >> Smoothness? I don't know where that would come from. Is there any >> improvement to the balancer? It could be lighter piston / rod. Are >> they lighter? >> >> Robert P. Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C >> +1 916 966 9060 >> FAX +1 916 966 9068 > <><><><><> > <><><><><> > > Robert, > > I think I've heard the 685 piston is about 70+ grams lighter than a stock > piston. There has also been discussion on another KLR forum that maybe > the engine was set up as a KLR600 originally and when it was made into > the KLR650 the only thing that changed was the displacement/top end. No > change to the balancer system or crankshaft etc. > > I don't know that the compression ratio is much different from a stock > KLR650. You can do a variety of base gaskets when doing the 685 with > 0.020" being the norm and 0.010" being high compression and 0.020" plus > 0.010" for a total of 0.030" being a bit low on compression but maybe > needed for really poor fuel quality. > > The power increase doesn't seem to be a big selling point with the 685 > set up. What many folks speak about is the reduction of perceived > vibration and correcting oil use issues. I think the oil use issue fix > might be the more popular reason for doing the 685 kit. > > Best, > > Jeff Saline > ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal > Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org > The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota > 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 > > . > . > __________________________________________________________ > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7d20cc6eb066d5aest03vuc > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[RobertWichert]

Are you going to use the thin gasket, Kenneth? Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 4/5/2012 2:17 PM, Kenneth Edick wrote: > I am currently in the process of completing my 688 upgrade because of the oil consumption problem. I will let the group know the outcome. > > Ken Colorado > On Apr 5, 2012, at 9:43 AM, Jeffrey wrote: > >> so u are going to get as much power boost or more by opening up the airbox, doing some cheap carb mods, exhaust tweaks... >> >> as boring! >> >> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > ------------------------------------ > > List Sponsors - Dual Sport News: http://www.dualsportnews.com > Arrowhead Motorsports: http://www.arrowheadmotorsports.com > List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok: http://www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html > Member Map: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DSN_KLR650/app/peoplemap/view/map > Group Apps: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DSN_KLR650/grouplets/subscriptionsYahoo! Groups Links > > > > > >

[RobertWichert]

That's huge, really. Almost 20% reduction in weight. I wonder what a light conn rod would do. Can you spell Titanium? Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 4/5/2012 9:19 PM, John Biccum wrote: > > Here is the weight of the stocker and the Schnitz 685 piston: > > http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#!i=49977402&k=axpdH > http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#%21i=49977402&k=axpdH> > > > JE s claimed weight confirmed with an appropriate scale, I weighed the > (new OEM replacement) piston on the same scale. My (pre-production) > 685 piston was not Moly-coated like the production 685s pistons are > but I don t think that coating weighs anything worth mentioning. > > *From:*DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com] > *On Behalf Of *RobertWichert > *Sent:* Thursday, April 05, 2012 7:08 AM > *To:* Jeff Saline > *Cc:* DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* Re: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. > > Jeff, > > 70 g is significant. If you know the weight of the stock piston, please > enlighten (HA!) me. Percentage change would be nice to know, but 70 g > is certainly a benefit. If that better matches the balancer, then there > you go! > > I have been told (I forget who said it) that you should always "use the > thinnest gasket to get the highest compression to see the most gains". > This is perfectly reasonable. If you look at the difference in > displacement, 685/650, it's about 5% larger. Since there aren 't larger > valves (there aren't are there?) and no porting is involved (there > isn't, right?) and the redline doesn't go up, the HP is going to go up > by 5%. 5% may be something you can feel, just maybe. Let's say the KLR > is 40 HP stock, for argument. A 5% increase is 2 HP. Can you feel 2 > HP? Yeah, maybe a little, but maybe not. It will be less at lower RPM, > so any "it's the mid range where you really feel it" isn't going to make > sense given the inputs. At mid range it's going to be 1 HP, maybe, and > probably not enough to notice. Torque is HP divided by RPM, so getting > more torque with more displacement is a given, but the torque curve > isn't going to change unless you change the cam, the valves, the airbox > (stock is probably higher midrange torque), or the exhaust (stock is > probably higher midrange torque). So any idea that "midrange torque is > much better" is also probably not going to match the inputs. 5% is all > you are going to get with just displacement. Compression could increase > that 2 HP to 5 HP, maybe. That's enough to feel, I think. You can play > around with that here: http://www.bgsoflex.com/crchange.html . > > Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > +1 916 966 9060 > FAX +1 916 966 9068 > > =============================================== > > On 4/4/2012 9:31 PM, Jeff Saline wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 21:00:57 -0700 RobertWichert > > > writes: > >> Some have said the increase in compression when doing the 685 made > >> most of the power difference. That makes tremendous sense. > >> Smoothness? I don't know where that would come from. Is there any > >> improvement to the balancer? It could be lighter piston / rod. Are > >> they lighter? > >> > >> Robert P. Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > >> +1 916 966 9060 > >> FAX +1 916 966 9068 > > <><><><><> > > <><><><><> > > > > Robert, > > > > I think I've heard the 685 piston is about 70+ grams lighter than a > stock > > piston. There has also been discussion on another KLR forum that maybe > > the engine was set up as a KLR600 originally and when it was made into > > the KLR650 the only thing that changed was the displacement/top end. No > > change to the balancer system or crankshaft etc. > > > > I don't know that the compression ratio is much different from a stock > > KLR650. You can do a variety of base gaskets when doing the 685 with > > 0.020" being the norm and 0.010" being high compression and 0.020" plus > > 0.010" for a total of 0.030" being a bit low on compression but maybe > > needed for really poor fuel quality. > > > > The power increase doesn't seem to be a big selling point with the 685 > > set up. What many folks speak about is the reduction of perceived > > vibration and correcting oil use issues. I think the oil use issue fix > > might be the more popular reason for doing the 685 kit. > > > > Best, > > > > Jeff Saline > > ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal > > Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org http://www.airheads.org> > > The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota > > 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 > > > > . > > . > > __________________________________________________________ > > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 > > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried > > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7d20cc6eb066d5aest03vuc > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Jeff Saline]

Robert, All I've found on the piston weights with a few quick searches showed a stock 1987 piston with carbon on top weighing in at 492 grams. The Schnitz site says the 685 piston is 83 grams less than stock. So the 412 grams on that box and the 83 grams lighter note would suggest a stock piston is about 495 grams. This goes nicely with John's post about his piston weighing in at 412 grams and I've found paperwork on my later 685 piston saying it weighs 413 grams. The installation paperwork from Schnitz says the piston is designed for 9.7 to 1 with the stock, 0.020" base gasket. That is what they recommend. They note the slight increase over stock compression is well tolerated. Other options are using both gaskets together for 9.55 to 1 compression ratio which they say is stock compression. They suggest this if best of lower grade fuels are going to be used. Using just the 0.010" base gasket for 9.85 to 1 compression is only recommended with premium fuel, if cams are to be installed or it you live and ride at higher elevations. I'll let you do whatever math you want to perform. Best, Jeff Saline ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 . . ____________________________________________________________ 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7eedd2d453cfb56fst04vuc [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[RobertWichert]

I'm not doing the modification, yet, but if I ever do I will certainly go the Schnitz route. I'm expecting that they buy their piston, they don't forge it, but I could be wrong. We used to use Weisco pistons, back in the stone age. They don't show anything for the KLR though. Regarding compression... I would go with the higher compression, for sure. I use premium anyway and if you are going where the gas is potable (Mexico) you can back off the timing a bit I suppose. 9.85:1 is puny compression, if you ask me. Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 4/6/2012 6:19 AM, Jeff Saline wrote: > > Robert, > > All I've found on the piston weights with a few quick searches showed a > stock 1987 piston with carbon on top weighing in at 492 grams. > > The Schnitz site says the 685 piston is 83 grams less than stock. > > So the 412 grams on that box and the 83 grams lighter note would suggest > a stock piston is about 495 grams. > > This goes nicely with John's post about his piston weighing in at 412 > grams and I've found paperwork on my later 685 piston saying it weighs > 413 grams. > > The installation paperwork from Schnitz says the piston is designed for > 9.7 to 1 with the stock, 0.020" base gasket. That is what they > recommend. They note the slight increase over stock compression is well > tolerated. > > Other options are using both gaskets together for 9.55 to 1 compression > ratio which they say is stock compression. They suggest this if best of > lower grade fuels are going to be used. > > Using just the 0.010" base gasket for 9.85 to 1 compression is only > recommended with premium fuel, if cams are to be installed or it you live > and ride at higher elevations. > > I'll let you do whatever math you want to perform. > > Best, > > Jeff Saline > ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal > Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org > The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota > 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 > > . > . > __________________________________________________________ > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7eedd2d453cfb56fst04vuc > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Jeff Saline]

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 08:10:11 -0700 RobertWichert writes:

> I'm not doing the modification, yet, but if I ever do I will > certainly > go the Schnitz route. I'm expecting that they buy their piston, > they > don't forge it, but I could be wrong. We used to use Weisco > pistons, > back in the stone age. They don't show anything for the KLR > though. > > Regarding compression... > > I would go with the higher compression, for sure. I use premium > anyway > and if you are going where the gas is potable (Mexico) you can back > off > the timing a bit I suppose. 9.85:1 is puny compression, if you ask > me. > > > Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > +1 916 966 9060 > FAX +1 916 966 9068

<><><><><> <><><><><> Robert, Just curious here as to how you'll retard the timing on a KLR. Best, Jeff Saline ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 . . ____________________________________________________________ 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7f08bae62cb106408st02vuc

[RobertWichert]

Yeah, I thought about that as I was typing it, Jeff. I don't know, but there must be a way to adjust it. Does the pickup coil have a sliding adjustment? The manual is silent on it, so maybe it cannot be adjusted, but I would think that odd. Do you know for a fact that it cannot be adjusted? And if not, well, that is the first time I've seen an engine that you COULDN'T adjust the timing. Live and learn I guess. Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 4/6/2012 8:14 AM, Jeff Saline wrote: > > On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 08:10:11 -0700 RobertWichert > > writes: > > I'm not doing the modification, yet, but if I ever do I will > > certainly > > go the Schnitz route. I'm expecting that they buy their piston, > > they > > don't forge it, but I could be wrong. We used to use Weisco > > pistons, > > back in the stone age. They don't show anything for the KLR > > though. > > > > Regarding compression... > > > > I would go with the higher compression, for sure. I use premium > > anyway > > and if you are going where the gas is potable (Mexico) you can back > > off > > the timing a bit I suppose. 9.85:1 is puny compression, if you ask > > me. > > > > > > Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > > +1 916 966 9060 > > FAX +1 916 966 9068 > <><><><><> > <><><><><> > > Robert, > > Just curious here as to how you'll retard the timing on a KLR. > > Best, > > Jeff Saline > ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal > Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org > The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota > 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 > > . > . > __________________________________________________________ > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7f08bae62cb106408st02vuc > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[RobertWichert]

The sticker on the inside of the side cover says "10 Degrees BTDC at 1300 RPM" for ignition timing and it says "No Adjustment" for Idle Mixture, so at least they give a figure. Still checking... Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 4/6/2012 8:39 AM, RobertWichert wrote: > > Yeah, I thought about that as I was typing it, Jeff. I don't know, but > there must be a way to adjust it. Does the pickup coil have a sliding > adjustment? The manual is silent on it, so maybe it cannot be adjusted, > but I would think that odd. > > Do you know for a fact that it cannot be adjusted? > > And if not, well, that is the first time I've seen an engine that you > COULDN'T adjust the timing. > > Live and learn I guess. > > Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > +1 916 966 9060 > FAX +1 916 966 9068 > > =============================================== > > On 4/6/2012 8:14 AM, Jeff Saline wrote: > > > > On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 08:10:11 -0700 RobertWichert > > > > > writes: > > > I'm not doing the modification, yet, but if I ever do I will > > > certainly > > > go the Schnitz route. I'm expecting that they buy their piston, > > > they > > > don't forge it, but I could be wrong. We used to use Weisco > > > pistons, > > > back in the stone age. They don't show anything for the KLR > > > though. > > > > > > Regarding compression... > > > > > > I would go with the higher compression, for sure. I use premium > > > anyway > > > and if you are going where the gas is potable (Mexico) you can back > > > off > > > the timing a bit I suppose. 9.85:1 is puny compression, if you ask > > > me. > > > > > > > > > Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > > > +1 916 966 9060 > > > FAX +1 916 966 9068 > > <><><><><> > > <><><><><> > > > > Robert, > > > > Just curious here as to how you'll retard the timing on a KLR. > > > > Best, > > > > Jeff Saline > > ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal > > Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org > > The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota > > 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 > > > > . > > . > > __________________________________________________________ > > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 > > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried > > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7f08bae62cb106408st02vuc > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Skypilot]

Ken, Please keep me apprissed of your findings. I am, all of the sudden, listening to oil burn threads closely. I have an early 2008 with 9k miles. I am about 2.5 hours from home on bussiness right now as I was last week. The ride is all Super Slab and I anm running about 80mph the whole way. I have been down a 1/2 quart for the round trip both times. Before that I never used any oil between changes. I run Rotella syth I dont know if it is do to the high speed pounding eating oil faster than my regular back roads/dirt roads riding or if I am starting to see the oil burn issue show up. If this turns out to be oil burn at its inception I will probably go to the 688 kit right away although I will try to get Kawi to fix it first

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Edick wrote: > > I am currently in the process of completing my 688 upgrade because of the oil consumption problem. I will let the group know the outcome. > > Ken Colorado

[revmaaatin]

There is a local RApid City machinest that is making connecting rods for the 5hp Briggs and Straton Go-Cart racing scene. How much is is 'special machined' and lightened connecting rod. $1500. Now that is farkle. What price if you buy two? revmaaatin.

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, RobertWichert wrote: > > That's huge, really. Almost 20% reduction in weight. I wonder what a > light conn rod would do. > > Can you spell Titanium? > > > Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > +1 916 966 9060 > FAX +1 916 966 9068 > > > > > > > > =============================================== > > > On 4/5/2012 9:19 PM, John Biccum wrote: > > > > Here is the weight of the stocker and the Schnitz 685 piston: > > > > http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#!i=49977402&k=axpdH > > http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#%21i=49977402&k=axpdH> > > > > > > JE s claimed weight confirmed with an appropriate scale, I weighed the > > (new OEM replacement) piston on the same scale. My (pre-production) > > 685 piston was not Moly-coated like the production 685s pistons are > > but I don t think that coating weighs anything worth mentioning. > > > > *From:*DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com] > > *On Behalf Of *RobertWichert > > *Sent:* Thursday, April 05, 2012 7:08 AM > > *To:* Jeff Saline > > *Cc:* DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com > > *Subject:* Re: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. > > > > Jeff, > > > > 70 g is significant. If you know the weight of the stock piston, please > > enlighten (HA!) me. Percentage change would be nice to know, but 70 g > > is certainly a benefit. If that better matches the balancer, then there > > you go! > > > > I have been told (I forget who said it) that you should always "use the > > thinnest gasket to get the highest compression to see the most gains". > > This is perfectly reasonable. If you look at the difference in > > displacement, 685/650, it's about 5% larger. Since there aren 't larger > > valves (there aren't are there?) and no porting is involved (there > > isn't, right?) and the redline doesn't go up, the HP is going to go up > > by 5%. 5% may be something you can feel, just maybe. Let's say the KLR > > is 40 HP stock, for argument. A 5% increase is 2 HP. Can you feel 2 > > HP? Yeah, maybe a little, but maybe not. It will be less at lower RPM, > > so any "it's the mid range where you really feel it" isn't going to make > > sense given the inputs. At mid range it's going to be 1 HP, maybe, and > > probably not enough to notice. Torque is HP divided by RPM, so getting > > more torque with more displacement is a given, but the torque curve > > isn't going to change unless you change the cam, the valves, the airbox > > (stock is probably higher midrange torque), or the exhaust (stock is > > probably higher midrange torque). So any idea that "midrange torque is > > much better" is also probably not going to match the inputs. 5% is all > > you are going to get with just displacement. Compression could increase > > that 2 HP to 5 HP, maybe. That's enough to feel, I think. You can play > > around with that here: http://www.bgsoflex.com/crchange.html . > > > > Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > > +1 916 966 9060 > > FAX +1 916 966 9068 > > > > =============================================== > > > > On 4/4/2012 9:31 PM, Jeff Saline wrote: > > > On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 21:00:57 -0700 RobertWichert > > > > > writes: > > >> Some have said the increase in compression when doing the 685 made > > >> most of the power difference. That makes tremendous sense. > > >> Smoothness? I don't know where that would come from. Is there any > > >> improvement to the balancer? It could be lighter piston / rod. Are > > >> they lighter? > > >> > > >> Robert P. Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C > > >> +1 916 966 9060 > > >> FAX +1 916 966 9068 > > > <><><><><> > > > <><><><><> > > > > > > Robert, > > > > > > I think I've heard the 685 piston is about 70+ grams lighter than a > > stock > > > piston. There has also been discussion on another KLR forum that maybe > > > the engine was set up as a KLR600 originally and when it was made into > > > the KLR650 the only thing that changed was the displacement/top end. No > > > change to the balancer system or crankshaft etc. > > > > > > I don't know that the compression ratio is much different from a stock > > > KLR650. You can do a variety of base gaskets when doing the 685 with > > > 0.020" being the norm and 0.010" being high compression and 0.020" plus > > > 0.010" for a total of 0.030" being a bit low on compression but maybe > > > needed for really poor fuel quality. > > > > > > The power increase doesn't seem to be a big selling point with the 685 > > > set up. What many folks speak about is the reduction of perceived > > > vibration and correcting oil use issues. I think the oil use issue fix > > > might be the more popular reason for doing the 685 kit. > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Jeff Saline > > > ABC # 4412 South Dakota Airmarshal > > > Airheads Beemer Club www.airheads.org http://www.airheads.org> > > > The Beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota > > > 75 R90/6, 03 KLR650 > > > > > > . > > > . > > > __________________________________________________________ > > > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 > > > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried > > > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f7d20cc6eb066d5aest03vuc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >