XTZ660 pros and cons

[MarkShelley]

Nobody seems to mention the XTZ660 when asked about suitable relatively cheap explorer bikes. The earlier XT600`S seem to have a good following and also the XT660E.
What is the problem with them (or not!)

[djadams]

From my point of view, as someone looking at an XT660R as a possible future travel bike, the XTZ misses a trick in that the standing riding position is awful. The tank is wide in just the wrong place, requiring you to bend your knees sideways.

That said, plenty of peeps have used the original style F650GS, and that requires you to do the same thing, so maybe some people have their knees on sideways

[mladen]

Are you thinking about the previous or the present XTZ660?

[MarkShelley]

Originally Posted by mladen

Are you thinking about the previous or the present XTZ660?

The 1991-1999 models.
I believe the new bike is actually an XT660Z.

[mladen]

I know that the new Tenere is the XT660Z, but almost everyone is calling it the XTZ660 like the previous one.

I had the exact same question as you last year, I had an Africa Twin, and as I was spending more and more time offroad, I wanted something cheaper that would handle off road better, but still be capable for some decent on road performance. The XTZ660 seemed the thing to go. On the paper everything is there, 168Kg dry weight, 48HP, big tank, Twin headlight (to remember me of my loved AT), low vibration for a single, wind prottection, and cheap so no worries about trashing it. On the net, very little information and as a model considered a non suxcesfull one, the worst of the Tenere.

So I bought one, like new with 22000Km and I have to say that in the real word is all there. I know about offroad one or two thing (own a KTM EXC450 and driving regularry hard enduro tracks once a week), and I have to say that it handles off road pretty good. In comparison to the AT is so much better offroad that is worst onroad. On the opposite of the previous post I find it comfortable and slim in standing possition. I changed and raised the handelbar, because the original one is how to say, strange? On the road is very smooth, and very fast on twisty roads. My have a Givi raised windshield and the wind protection is good. The brakes are not brilliant, but they do the job. The suspension is good for onroad solo driving, too soft for offroad or two up. I stiffend it up. For my stile of riding is perfect. I really don't know why it has a bad reputtation.

If you compare it to the new one, you have 15Kg less and same power. I have previously posted in different forums a question for the owners of the old and new model what is a difference between them, but noone ever answered me. I'm looking forward to test drive the new one, because I really like to see if some decent progress was made between the two models.

So for a suitable relatively cheap explorer bike I recommend it. I will take it in the Tunisian desert next year and I know that it would be more fun that it was with my AT.

[MarkShelley]

Thanks mladen. You have confirmed my thoughts. I have owned my 1991 model for 2 months now and I have been very impressed with it. It had Renthal bars on when I got it so I can`t comment on the stock bars, but I find the riding position very comfy indeed. I have more Distanzia type tyres on at the moment and the tarmac handling is great. I have extended the screen myself (using an old visor!) and it will happily sit at 75-80 on a motorway. It is just perfect for the potholed windy minor roads around where I live. I have a spare set of wheels with enduro tyres and will give it a go off road soon. I do not find the standing position strange at all.
Look on the bright side, if they keep their unfashionable reputation the prices will stay down!