I have taken a closer look at the WR this weekend.

Haven't ridden it yet, but <BEEP> that bike is well built!

It feels a great deal sturdier that the KLX. I am beginning to understand the general opinion that the WR is better at everything except the price.

We went on a short biking trip this weekend and I spent a day pretending I was on the KLX. I simulated KLXness by shifting up my transalp at 3500 rpm and restricting the top speed to 107 km/h. That got rather tedious after a while...

Not while crusing at a constant speed on the highway. 100km/h is fine, but when trying to overtake trucks, RVs and caravans you really feel it. It also got rather dangerous when I got sandwiched between a truck a caravan and a somewhat annoyed German in his Audi.

If it is that annoying and even dangerous in the course of one weekend what will it be like during a 4 month trip?

The only advantage of the KLX previously unregarded is its fuel-economy. It seposedly rivals my wifes NX250 at 1:33 km/l - 93 mpg (uk) - 77.6 mpg (us) when taking it easy. Compare that to the WR at 25 km/l and the environmentalist in me starts to scratch his head.

I have a passion for fuel economy and GHG thrifty modes of transport and have been trying to combine that with adventure motorcycling... not the easiest of tasks.

Therefore the KLXes performance appeals to me, but not if it achieves it fuel economy by requiring you to push it several miles back to the workshop because it broke down again...

With regards to the local emissions (CO, NOx, PM10) the WR wins hands down. The KLXs FI and restriction was implemented to cheat it past current EU legislation while the WR complies with room to spare.

That raises the question whether you want to ride round the world on a bike made by a company that thinks bodging in a fuel injection system and then restricting performance above 50 mph to that of a 125cc bike to beat emission regulations is a good solution...

Well... I am test riding the WR later this week...

Kind regards,

Wr
 

As a WR rider this is very funny. Bikes develop cult-like followings for a reason and, against some people's sanity and better judgement, the WR is becoming one of those bikes. There have always been bikes like the WR that, on paper at least, are very comparable. Just go and sit on one. Ride it. You'll see that it make a lot of the old bikes seem lacking when they clearly aren't. Is it the modern finish, the rev'iness, the well thought out design? All good bikes have some flaw or other and the WR is no different. It will make you smile though. Again and again.

I had a 2004 Yamaha TTR600RE with 6000km, for 6 months - sold it this spring...... It was a real dissappaointment in many areas.

OK, so its a re-hash of the old XT, but thats no different to the KLR ethos.

Before that I had a 1986 DR600 with 50k miles - much nicer bike, even though it was a bit past it (smoked a bit & had a few minor oil leaks) but tough as old boots!

I now have a 1982 Honda XL500R with 18k miles, which has a much better motor (the heart of any bike), more grunt, faster & more economical. :mchappy: Its light, just suffers from mediocre drum brakes & tired suspension.

As for Kawasaki, I have had many 70's/80's in-line 4's and they are superb - strong motors & well over engineered :thumbup1:

Just my humble experiences of the last 30 yrs :smartass:

I have just tried the WR

:w00t:

I'm in love...

I felt instantly comfortable and confident. The suspention is SO much better. I can believe that it is possible to forget you are on a 250cc bike. Plenty of power where you want it.

I want one!

Too bad I won't have any money left for all the nice goodies you can get for them...

You don't need most of the upgrades (except a rear rack probably). A lot of the fixes involve removing bits, which is free (Exup, AIS, flapper etc..)

I ride mine 'stock' - gearing, seat, exhaust etc..
It's coming to Russia with me next year...

you must have gotten some of the better bikes. every one I've seen is inadequately designed in key areas, namely oiling, or the transmission.

after working on the inner workings of them, they're crap to me. now give me an SRAD GSXR 750, I'll be satisfied. THAT is an over engineered motor, and quite durable/well thought out(much as I dislike suzuki usually)

my personal favorite, is hondas though. they lack in some areas, usually suspension/brakes, but their drivelines are generally rock solid, and unless you pretty much ride with no oil, or wheelie them nonstop and 12 them, you simply CANT even hurt them.

is it really true how bad kawa engineering is or you just work for yamaha, honda dealer ???