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

[RobertWichert]

Titanium or nothing!! Robert P. Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068

On Apr 6, 2012, at 12:12 PM, "revmaaatin" wrote: > 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] > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Eddie]

iirc, don't those little flatheads make about 20+h.p. on fuel? Imagine a KLR with 4X the power. Scary! Speaking of which, has anyone looked at the new heavy but powerful (135h.p.) shaft drive Triumph ? eddie

> > On Apr 6, 2012, at 12:12 PM, "revmaaatin" wrote: > > > 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. >

[John Biccum]

The first question that Cary (the developer of the 685) asked me when I told him I had mine running on the prototype piston was how is the vibration? Cary hypothesized that the lower reciprocating mass would make the engine vibrate less. He was right it is MUCH smoother. Aside from the lower fuel economy I noticed only one other modest downside of the 685: a slight decrease in engine braking capacity. I had expected that a bigger piston would improve engine braking but Cary enlightened me that it s the mass not the diameter that provides the engine braking. BTW, my bike has 30,711 miles on the new piston, 25,386 on the oversize valves and 64,406 miles on the bike. It still doesn t burn oil, still is a reliable as rain and still puts a smile on my face every time I ride it. The KLR has been displaced as my commute scoot by an ABS bike better suited to rainy weather commuting amongst Seattle s insane cagers. But the bike picked up 1,100 miles in Death Valley a couple of weeks ago and performed flawlessly. From: RobertWichert [mailto:robert@...] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 10:09 PM To: John Biccum Cc: 'Jeff Saline'; DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. 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 http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#%21i=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]

[John Biccum]

I spent some time recently following my KLR when a friend was riding it Death Valley. I noted that at highway speeds I could smell unburned fuel in air, suggesting that I still have some more work to do on the jetting. I too am using the KLX needle which is very rich at higher throttle settings. When I went to the KLX needle I went DOWN a jet size ( to a 140 main, KLX needle is on 2nd clip position). I might try a different clip position or drop another jet size. Any topic is bound to irritate some but my rule is to keep it civil and if that proves impossible take it off the list. From: Cox, John [mailto:John.Cox@...] Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 6:38 PM To: John Biccum; 'RobertWichert' Cc: 'Jeff Saline'; DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. Wow that s a lot of miles. I also noticed less vibration and lower gas mileage after the 685 mod but I attributed the lower mpg to the klx needle we installed at the time of the 685 upgrade and also to the positive reinforcement I get every time I roll on the throttle. I believe a richer mixture also decreases vibration and the cooling load. I usually avoiding commenting on these subjects due to the fact that EM and I made both mods at the same time while the bike was down for a head rebuild. Also the topic seems to irritate some From: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Biccum Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 6:18 PM To: 'RobertWichert' Cc: 'Jeff Saline'; DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. The first question that Cary (the developer of the 685) asked me when I told him I had mine running on the prototype piston was how is the vibration? Cary hypothesized that the lower reciprocating mass would make the engine vibrate less. He was right it is MUCH smoother. Aside from the lower fuel economy I noticed only one other modest downside of the 685: a slight decrease in engine braking capacity. I had expected that a bigger piston would improve engine braking but Cary enlightened me that it s the mass not the diameter that provides the engine braking. BTW, my bike has 30,711 miles on the new piston, 25,386 on the oversize valves and 64,406 miles on the bike. It still doesn t burn oil, still is a reliable as rain and still puts a smile on my face every time I ride it. The KLR has been displaced as my commute scoot by an ABS bike better suited to rainy weather commuting amongst Seattle s insane cagers. But the bike picked up 1,100 miles in Death Valley a couple of weeks ago and performed flawlessly. From: RobertWichert [mailto:robert@... ] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 10:09 PM To: John Biccum Cc: 'Jeff Saline'; DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. 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# http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx> !i=49977402 http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#%21i=49977402 http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/Motorcycles/KLR-Engine/1030345_GkQXLx#%21i=49977402&k=axpdH> &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] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[ron criswell]

Out of all those big adventure bikes, I like the Triumph the best. I saw one in Big Bend Natl. Park a few months ago riding with a KLR group. The KLR-er's said he was going everywhere they were. He had a skid plate. Criswell Sent from my iPad

On Apr 6, 2012, at 2:39 PM, "eddie" wrote: > > iirc, don't those little flatheads make about 20+h.p. on fuel? > Imagine a KLR with 4X the power. Scary! > Speaking of which, has anyone looked at the new heavy but powerful > (135h.p.) shaft drive Triumph ? > eddie > > > > > On Apr 6, 2012, at 12:12 PM, "revmaaatin" wrote: > > > > > 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. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[David Nichols]

John, Your broken piston scares me. I really was planning on trying to ride the bike until it either corrected itself (yeah...right) or I had the time and funds at the end of the riding season. Which in Texas is...December? ________________________________ From: John Biccum To: 'RobertWichert' ; 'Jeff Saline' Cc: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2012 11:19 PM Subject: RE: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. 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] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[mark ward]

WHAT did I hear? A KLR650,... IN TEXAS....... WITH A "RIDE SEASON"? How much snow and ICE do Y'all get??? LOL In Michigan, COLD, NASTY, weather, we have a saying, "There is No INAPPROPRIATE weather, just Inappropriate gear." When it comes to Fishing, You either take, suntan lotion & a hat, OR hand warmers & an ICE SCOOP. lol Travel Safe! and Travel Well! .

--- On Tue, 4/10/12, David Nichols wrote: From: David Nichols Subject: Re: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. To: "John Biccum" , "'RobertWichert'" , "'Jeff Saline'" Cc: "DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com" DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com> Date: Tuesday, April 10, 2012, 1:24 PM John, Your broken piston scares me. I really was planning on trying to ride the bike until it either corrected itself (yeah...right) or I had the time and funds at the end of the riding season. Which in Texas is...December? ________________________________ From: John Biccum To: 'RobertWichert' ; 'Jeff Saline' Cc: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2012 11:19 PM Subject: RE: [DSN_KLR650] My oil burning problem. 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] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]