pirelli mt-70 update

[Ted Palmer]

Greg Dawson wrote: [...]

> I read this article http://home.att.net/~flafrank/kawasaki.htm and > the author says: > "On the down side. You can't expect Rolex quality at Timex prices. > The bike has a life expectancy of probably 50,000 km (30,000 mi) max." > Does this sound about right?

Depends on how you define "life expectancy". It sounds like the author believes that a bike is worn out by the time it needs a new camchain. A well maintained and soberly ridden KLR should make 100,000km without too much trouble. Racetrack forays and weekends spent keeping sportsbikes honest through the twisties does reduce the life a bit. Mister_T Melbourne,Australia

[Tom Simpson]

Greg Dawson wrote:

> > Hi all, I'm new to the group. I've considered purchasing a KLR 650 > for some time now and I'd like to know how many miles I should expect > to put on one before it gets retired. > > I read this article http://home.att.net/~flafrank/kawasaki.htm and > the author says: > > "On the down side. You can't expect Rolex quality at Timex prices. > The bike has a life expectancy of probably 50,000 km (30,000 mi) max."

That article is a widely known and quoted piece of crap. Mine has almost 47,000 miles on it and I haven't even pulled the float bowl off the carburetor. The engine has needed two valve adjustments and the usual maintenance, and that's it. I know of one bike that had over 100,000 well thrashed miles on its bottom end before it finally sheared a counterballancer shaft and hand grenaded. These are tough bikes that generally do not give a lot of trouble. -Tom '96 KLR 650

[Mark]

At 11:01 AM +0000 10/13/00, Greg Dawson wrote:

>Hi all, I'm new to the group. I've considered purchasing a KLR 650 >for some time now and I'd like to know how many miles I should expect >to put on one before it gets retired. > >I read this article http://home.att.net/~flafrank/kawasaki.htm and >the author says: > >"On the down side. You can't expect Rolex quality at Timex prices. >The bike has a life expectancy of probably 50,000 km (30,000 mi) max."

The author of that article should pull his head out of his ass and see what KLRs are doing in the real world. Mark '88 KLR650 44,000 miles '90 KLR650 Tengai 29,000 miles

[Kurt Simpson (Editor Dual Sport News)]

> > That article is a widely known and quoted piece of crap. Mine has > almost 47,000 miles on it and I haven't even pulled the float bowl off > the carburetor. The engine has needed two valve adjustments and the > usual maintenance, and that's it. I know of one bike that had over > 100,000 well thrashed miles on its bottom end before it finally sheared > a counterballancer shaft and hand grenaded. These are tough bikes that > generally do not give a lot of trouble.

Here is where I suspect we can respectfully get the article changed. Let's have one person from the KORG/BORG write Frank and ask him to change the wording of that paragraph. Give him some time and if he doesn't change it start flooding him with messages until he does...he should know better and his site gets lots of traffic.... Kurt

[fewmoremiles@webtv.net]

I have a friend in miss, that has been to alaska 3 times on KLRs , he ownes 2 of them said only bought the 2nd one becaues it real low miles then and a good price the last one is a98 model with over 80.000 on the clock he ,s been to alaska twice on it , with out major problems , oh yea he ,s over 70 years too , i think hes awise man , and i believe he could get any bike he wanted to travel with , I thought i out grew the ole single cyc, 20 years ago but he made me stop and think now i own a 2001 KLR my self best regards Jim

[k650dsn@aol.com]

The KLR is a true third world bike unlike your typical fuel injected BMW. Also not the comment about volve adjustments. I rest my case. Just ride it. Gino --- In DSN_klr650@egroups.com, "Kurt Simpson \(Editor Dual Sport News\)" wrote:

> > > > That article is a widely known and quoted piece of crap. Mine

has

> > almost 47,000 miles on it and I haven't even pulled the float

bowl off

> > the carburetor. The engine has needed two valve adjustments

[Kurt Simpson]

> The KLR is a true third world bike unlike your typical fuel injected > BMW. Also not the comment about volve adjustments. I rest my case. > Just ride it.

I don't see that there has to be much of a dispute about valve adjustments. The idea is to think of break-in as the first 6,000 miles. During that period, I would check mine at 500, 1500, 3000 and 6000. After that every 10,000 miles is good. That is 4 valve checks for 16,000 miles...the average rider puts on 3,500 - 5000 miles a year (my guess) so that means 4 21/2 hour checks over three years. This hardly seems to be a big issue to me... Kurt

[frjsmithjr@webtv.net]

Attachments :

Another word or two on life expectancy. I was in my local Kawasaki shop yesterday for a service on the Connie. Had a chat with the mechanic that bought my '92 KLR in Jan. of '98 when I bought a new '98 KLR. He still has the bike, and has logged over 74,000 miles on it. Valve adjustments were not discussed, but he's still running the original clutch, top end and bottom end and gets 50 mpg!. He uses synthetic blend oil. This is why (among other reasons) I'm selling the KTM and buying a new KLR. Jim Smith COG# Pending Y2K Connie Y2K KTM Adventure R (for sale)

[bill e goat]

> I'm going to go easy on Florida Frank because he is a long-distance > motorcyclist to South America, China and a lot of other places most

of us

> have never been. But I don't agree with him about the KLR - mine

is an A12

> with 41,000 miles, including two meandering trips totalling nearly

30k

> miles over two summers from Florida to Alaska and back

Florida Frank, I believe, it quite firmly entrenched over at the BMW camp. But his F650 did break down on him a couple of times in Siberia.

[Michael Kovaliv]

I have a 98 KLR that I just rolled over 25,000 Klm this week. I have only had the bike one year and it had 8,000 Klm on it when I purchased it. I have done all my own service and even the valve jobs and plan on keeping the bike until it "dies". My question is this: What does "die" mean in terms of a bike? I'm learning more about bikes every day (I watch Speedvision you know, just kidding) and see bikes rebuilt that are older than my grandfather. Does there come a point when it's not worth fixing or replacing parts on the KLR and you just toss it in the garbage? Should I replace my KLR every 50-75,000 Klm just to be safe and avoid expensive repairs? Maybe I should not worry about it and deal with it when the time comes and something does actually go wrong. What do you think? Michael A12