My apologies to you all. I get fed up with the continuous waffle that the latest bike has to be the best bike. To that end I claimed that someone on this thread was telling porkies. It was more of a misdirection than a lie and for that I apologise.
I started in the motor trade, as a mechanic working on Toyotas, in 1970 and have moved on to do engineering work for the MoD and others. I'm 60 years old and I like to hear both sides of the arguement.
I'll leave air-cooled versus water cooled debate to the people that want to read this thread. However, may I point out that when the legislation changed, so that cars had to have catalytic converters on, it was a retrograde step. The 'lean burn' engine was being developed and this would have given far greater benefits, and more quickly, than the step to cats! It would have been infinitely more ecologically sound as well. Check out what cats are made of and how easy they are to recycle?
To this end I've chosen simple engineering, zero content of water cooling, ABS, and fuel injection. The bike I've chosen, to go around the World, is 9 years old (2003) with a much longer pedigree than anything built now. The reason why it isn't built now? Our Draconian emission regulations! The Suzuki DR650 is still sold in Canada and America yet hasn't been sold here since the later part of the 1990s. Our emission regs yet again.
I've owned 3 KTMs from new, a 950 Adventure (one of the best bike's I've ridden), an RC8 and a 990SMT. I own a Valkyrie, a Fazer 1000 (Yes, it's carbed), and a TTR250 as well as my ATW steed - a Yamaha XT600E.
I've done the Northern route through Mongolia on an air-cooled Ural 750 sidecar outfit and I never wanted more power or more complexity.
As I stated before, You make the decision based on your experience, or the experiences of your friends, and your understanding of where you're going to ride. Air-cooled or water cooled? Your choice, but I'd help anyone out, irrespective of what bike they ride, if they broke down near me.