New KTM 390 Adventure
 

New KTM 390 Adventure spotted! No its not a rework of their current 390 Adv. The new one has a new engine (same as in the new Duke 390) of 399 cc in stead of 373 cc as of the existing 390.

The engine will be in a different tune, a tiny bit up in peak HP, more torque and peak power at lower rpm.
The frame will be totally different too and wheels will be 21/18 spoked. Rumors says it will be around 180 kilos wet weight - but specs not clear for the moment.

So what do you think guys and gals? The existing 373 cc engine is a peppy one but very revvy - and absolutely no power under 4000 rpm, so not very well suited for those really bad roads. The new engine seems a tad better - but still might be a bit revvy and high strung???
And around 180 kilos wet weight? Thats certainly a bit of weight, lighter than the new Himalayan but a lot heavier than for example the good old Dr650 and the Honda Crf250/300 Rally….

https://www.cycleworld.com/motorcycl...ure-spy-shots/

At first I thought it would blow the CRF300 out of the water, 'till I saw the expected weight. And having witnessed the advantage of the little Honda's smooth and low down power/torque delivery amongst some nasty bouldery river beds, I suspect the CRF will have the edge off road. Of course, the peak power figures and the orange zest will still sell well with those who wouldn't be seen dead on a Honda.
Nice to see some attention being paid to this sector though. Suzuki DRZ400 2.0 and Yamaha WR450R anyone...?

I think it will come down to price tbh , the 300s are hardly rushing out of the dealership . U might as well buy the new cf moto 450 when it comes out . A few extra kilos ain't going to kill you......assuming u know how to pick the bike up properly in the first place . Given its low price and monthly payments the general view is they will sell like hotcakes . Hopefully get to blag one once the techs have built it . Let's b honest about this....in the UK at least the bikes are only going to go up gravel tracks / green lines in the majority of cases , not many of our customers are going to be doing a South American desert in the foreseeable future

Easy to say, if you're a) a reasonably strong man, 2: don't have to pick it up many times, or thirdly are completely able-bodied.

you dont have to be strong to pick up a bike.....its down to technique . as for dropping it alot.......take a different route . cant help with the last bit , but as a disabled chap i tend to stop and consider where im about to ride before leaping in

If you watch the tiny American lady who teaches at the bmw off road school manhandle her gsa 1250 all doubts should be erased......its practise and technique not pure strength ?c?

I'm a woman with one working leg who rides Moto Gymkhana on a 200kg bike, I'll have to pick it up 20 times in a day if I'm pushing my limits. But that's on a flat, dry, grippy surface, and I can appreciate there's plenty of riders who aren't as strong as me.

Also, please share with me your secrets on trail divination, I'd love to know how to have an adventure free from unexpected hardship.

Well id look at the topgraphy.......its going to be fairly obvious what ur likely to encounter ....... nothing magic there . Just as u wouldnt go piling into a river if u didnt know its depth . If the trail starts to get difficult then you should be mature enough to make a judgement call ......... an example being when the long way round guys decided to go down into a valley which proved rather difficult to get out of . For the sort of things you do then lightness i would guess is pretty important and more power to you . But theres no point having a sub 200kg bike then putting 16+stone of rider on it , then tons of kit and moaning when it gets too heavy :innocent: . Bit like 20stone sports bike riders putting an end can on to save 2kg .

Btw I have to disagree with the last bit about unexpected hardship equalling an adventure but now we are getting off topic :oops2:

Hardship is a side-effect of adventure, and as an example topology doesn't tell you where trails have been washed away.

To bring this back on-topic, weight is very important to many riders - even if it's only because a heavy bike is harder to manage in a parking lot, it's still a valid concern.

My riding set up has recently lost 9kg - 31kg to go - and getting my leg over (f'narr f'narr) is a lot easier too.

I'll agree to disagree with u :clap: seat height , where the weight of the bike is carried is more important then its kerb weight . A top heavy lighter bike is always going to feel so ....... as an example .
As for topography not showing washed out trails , that's what watching the weather and asking locals is for .
You don't have to suffer hardship to have an adventure....
Bad planning and or decision making are just that......
For some people just getting on the ferry is out of their comfort zone .
Anyways the manufacturers aren't going to do supaliteadventure bikes end of , it's a niche that doesn't mean big sales simple as that . They make their money on small capacity machines sold in India or south east Asia..........

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here ... one person says they're not interested because of the weight, you say weight doesn't matter, I say it does matter to a lot of people, and you say ...?

Weight being high or low doesn't make much difference when pushing a bike along the pavement to get it parked, just as it makes no difference if you're buried up to your axles in mud.

OK so to 99.9 of our customers weight does not matter , its seat height height . People go on about weight then overload the bike . Learn how to pick the bike up and get it out of the muddy rut.........light is fine If u r riding off the trails all the time but it them compromises road use .

Then why does KTM make lots of light bikes? (just not this one)

Speaking as an able bodied and reasonably strong male, I have to say weight does matter - or at least, where it's carried. I've picked up a KTM 790 a few times without too much difficulty, but recently couldn't manage an XT660Z that had fallen over downhill on tarmac. That bugs me, because I'm looking for handle-ability (KTM) in a relatively simple bike (Yamaha) but not something of few ccs as I value that for the road miles.

So for me a heavy, electronics-laden bike lacking punch doesn't ring any bells.

Weight matters A LOT when the roads get rough and tough! The difference riding a 250 kilo bike like a GSA/GS or Africa Twin or similar versus a 150-160 kilo bike like a Crf250/300 Rally or a Dr650 through a rough stretch of road is GIGANTIC! Those who disagree are bloody liars!

The difference of the new KTM 390 with an anticipated weight of 180 kilos versus a 150-160 kilo bike is of course not that huge but still quite noticable and a disadvantage for the new 390 versus lighter bikes.

As the Youtuber Big Rock Moto said about some other models but still very true and valid: «The new Transalp is a much better offroad bike then the Africa Twin simply because its much lighter»

On my first expedition with an XT660Z in 2009 I used soft luggage. I dropped the bike in a gorge near Cirque de Jaffar in Morocco and like you, the bike was downhill with the seat lower than the wheels. I found I couldn't lift it, even with the luggage removed. I sat back and waited as there's always someone along, and a couple of hours later a group of silver-haired French walkers came by who helped me.

The problem was that there's limited lifting places on the Tenere. Once I had pannier rails fitted for aluminium panniers, lifting was dead easy.

As for weight distribution, I quite like a top-heavy bike. Weighting the pegs to turn when you are on something like a 1200GS doesn't have much effect and you carry straight on, whilst the top-heavy XT660Z is inherently unstable (as is a Eurofighter) which means it is quick and easy to turn.