An interesting report, which I'm still digesting.

The mileage puzzle is certainly connected to the rpm's you report. My 650 turns 5000-5500 rpm's at indicated 70 mph (which is more like 65 mph actual). It gets 45-50 miles per US gallon, depending on load. Your 250 is turning over a lot faster ("7000-8000") at that speed, which would concern me in the long term. Maybe it shouldn't.

As I just wrote on another thread, I've had mileage from mid-twenties (fully loaded, very strong headwinds, bad gas in Patagonia) to mid-seventies (very sedate pace, no baggage, calm winds, flat gravel road in B.C,). From your description, the 250 does better, but not really that much better. Purchased new, it costs about the same, but I wouldn't expect it to last as long in high-mileage touring due to the rpm issue--my 650 has 95,000 miles on it.

I assume the 250 is far superior away from pavement or in true off-road situations, but again I'm not sure from your report whether this is much of an issue once you're heavily loaded, therefore somewhat insecure no matter what you do. It remains intriguing, particularly since I think I'm through with 6 month and yearlong trips for a while. On shorter trips with minimal baggage it would sure be nice to lose a hundred pounds of machinery.

Thanks again for the report. If you're ever down this way maybe we could do a trade.....?

Mark

Thanks for the additional thoughts Mark.

I have to admit that, in retrospect, I wonder about the point of the whole experiment. There is not a substantial cost saving over a KLR either in the purchase price (at least in Canada) or operation expense. The limited range on a tank of gas is a pain and I'm no dirt rider in any event. It may simplly come down to the pleasure of riding something so light and yet so capable.

Norm

Thanks for the report. There are a few who continue to advance the idea of smaller bikes for long distance travel. My wife and I have been on 250s since 2006, first on Ninja 250s and now on Super Sherpas, with a total of 120,000 km traveled--70,000 currently on the Sherpas--which is much the same engine as the KLX250, but air cooled and with a single carburetor.

I fully agree with your point that it is not necessary, nor particularly advantageous, to have the big behemoth bike fully kitted with the bling to travel successfully for long distances, but the myth and mystique goes on.

I am curious about your fuel consumption issue. Our Sherpas average 30-32 km per liter, which is roughly 3.3 L per 100 km or 70+ mpg. This is consistent loaded or unloaded, with larger main jets installed and with a smaller front sprocket for added low end grunt. With a 9 liter tank this gives us a range of nearly 300 km. We can cruise 90+ km/h if we have to and comfortably ride at 60-80 all day long. We avoid motorways and major highways like the plague.

We were at the first Greece HUBB meet last week where the predominant moto was the popular beast. Few could believe we have traveled so far on small bikes. Once again, as at all the other HUBB meetings we have been to, we observed a number of people struggling on excessively heavy bikes which were too big for them. Big and tall people would obviously not fit on a 250, and it is not for 2up, but many people could benefit from considering a smaller bike--but to each his/her own desire.

Go small or go home.

Joel and Taz--somewhere in Greece.

Just found this thread. I live in Thailand and have recently picked up a KLX250SF (FI) in part due to the lack of other affordable, practical options here. I have put about 5k kilometers on it in the last couple months and am considering a trip around India and back. I am also a little concerned about the limited range--I've been getting about ~110 miles out of a tank. Considering the BMW 650GS (FI) I had years ago which got me around 70mpg loaded, this little bike seems to gulp it down.
Anyone know how to squeeze more mpg's out of one of these--different fuel injector, chip, etc.?

As discussed in this thread back in summer 2012, it's all in your right wrist, although you could play around with the sprockets.

I used to ride a twin spark F650GS also, and the 70 MPG was easily achieved, but that engine was turning over, at 70 MPH say, far slower than a 250cc engine doing the same road speed.
The same goes for my XT225 which won't even/ever get up to 70 MPH with it's standard gearing.

__________________
Dave

It would concern me also, in the long term for the overall life of the engine and in the day to day running for the oil level; my Yam XT225 has less than 1 litre of oil in the sump and it needs a watchful eye on the level therefore.
I guess a KLX carries "not much oil" in the engine.

__________________
Dave

On an oil change the KLX engine takes only 1.0 litre of oil (filter in), 1.3 litres when the engine is completely dry. So, right, the level needs watching.

The KLX250s sold in North America is carburated and a fuel injected variant only appears to be available in some parts of Asia. The carburated version can be a moody starter and needs much warming up. This apparently has to do with pollution control issues. I assume that FI has solved that problem.

I had my KLX out for a cold but sunny city ride today and was reminded what a treat it is to handle. I'd say that's the best thing about going light.

Norm

the klx250 has fi in europe as well

__________________
I’m not afraid to go fast, it’s the crash and burn part that sucks.

Thought I'd briefly relate the end of my experiment with a 250 as a dual purpose touring bike.

I came to the realization that what I enjoyed most about it, its lightness and tossability, really only came into play during city riding and on the occassional gravel/dirt road that I encounter. 98% of my travelling does not take place under those conditions so my attraction to going light was really about the small spaces in between the type of riding I really do.

Therefore, the klx250s was sold and replaced by a 2012 V-strom 650. The Wee feels top heavy and clumsy around town compared to the 250 but once underway on good paved highways it is, I must admit, a much more comfortable and relaxed experience than a strung out small engine can deliver.

In my original post I suggested that the 250 (with a better seat and a bigger tank) was a "perfectly good" d/s tourer. I still think that's sort of true but perhaps "adequate" would be a better description for long distance riding. I guess I craved more than adequate.

Norm, you went back to a big bike? What a sell-out! I'm on my way from a Tiger 800 to a Kawi 250. That being said, I love my Tiger and would keep both if I could.

What seat upgrades have people done on the Kawasaki KLX?

With you there JillGat, just sold my tiger (cracking bike by the way) and now looking for a smaller alternative.

I have to admit that I miss the KLX.

As far as seat upgrades are concerned, I mentioned in my original post that I used an Airhawk which had served nicely on my ZR7-S. But it does not work very well on the KLX's narrow seat which allows the Airhawk to move around quite a bit. I ended up securing the thing further with lengths of electrical tape but it still loosened up eventually and started random migrations.

There are after market, wider (somewhat) seats available and that would be the way to go.

Happy trails.

perfect! I'm just considering klx250 EFI as well as a second bike for shorter trips and more fun off-road. Good to hear klx so capable and reliable bike.


p.s.
BTW what's wrong with all those companies putting 2 gallons small tank on DS bikes...
it's like conspiracy.

hey guys,

about to take my klx250s from Alaska to Patagonia.

i need to create a spare parts kit and was wondering what you would recommend.

thanks!

T