XR600 vs XR650L

**danielsprague** · #1 7 Apr 2004

Hi

Just been thinking... surely if the XR650L is the perfect overlander, then the XR600 is not far short?

Whats the difference in the engines? Is the XR600's more highly stressed??

Cheers

Dan

**Steve Pickford** · #2 7 Apr 2004

Neither engine is stressed more than the other. The 650L is e/start (kickstart also?), the 600 is kickstart only. I assume that the 650L has the RFVC head (of no real benefit in the real world), the 600 does not.

Go for the 650L, preferably overland equipped, it's bound to be a newer bike & in better condition.

Surely there can't be much more info that you need to base your decision on? Have you checked out the Chris Scott site yet. re: Africa & the 650L prep?

Steve

**POB/London** · #3 7 Apr 2004

600Rs are more common and a lot cheaper in the UK. The 600 is also significantly lighter. I believe the cam is more extreme and the final drive ratios are different.

The 650L is proper road-legal (has a heavy duty proper stator and lights) and has the electric boot. Does indeed have the RFVC head.

650L is by far the better overlander, IMHO.

**wbagwell** · #4 9 Apr 2004

The 600 has better suspension and makes much more power, but keep in mind that it's designed to be a racing bike, not a travel bike. By the time you add everything you need to make the 600 an overlander and weight it down, the extra performance it gives you will be irrelevant. The 650L is a better starting point.

**jim stanley** · #5 14 Jun 2004

I rode 50,000 km of South America on a modified xr650l (see sopgear.com for setup) while my partners for 1/2 the trip were on XR600's. Maybe it's a grass is greener thing, but I think the 600 is the better bike, unless you are very adverse to kickstarting. The 600 is lighter, more powerful, and simpler (less to go wrong)

------------------
Back on the road again.

sopgear.com