A motorcycle's true capabilities are not decided by marketing hype, not necessarily limited in real-world use by components lacking pedigrees. Surely few riders doubt that Japanese designed motorcycles excel in reliability and value. Offered from 1986 to 2007, the original KLR650 with only minor modifications over the years has been a favorite multi-purpose motorcycle for many riders and a global adventure touring mount for some. Upgraded and restyled for 2008, the new KLR650 is now an even better multi-purpose motorcycle. The narrative below explains why I think so.
—Verle Nelson, Cedaredge Colorado
2008 KAWASAKI KLR 650 Purchased new January 8, 2008 from Billy Aller at Davis Service Center, Montrose, CO. Traded back to Davis Service Center on July 11, 2008 after nearly 12,000 happy miles.
This KLR650 put me back on the road again after hitting a deer with my KTM 690SM on January 2, 2008. Some will ask why I went from a KTM 690SM to a Kawasaki KLR650. That's a legitimate question. Just don't ask which is best because they are not comparable. The KTM 690SM is a thoroughbred, evolved from machines with a racing heritage, an expensive, exotic motorcycle designed for performance and assembled from top-drawer components. It's a great motorcycle for fast paved canyons and very good on gravel roads. It's huge fun. The KLR650 is an inexpensive, comfortable, user-friendly tool for exploring roads long or short, paved or unpaved. It's everyman's motorcycle. To use a metaphor: a fling with a super model might be great fun but you wouldn't expect the affair to last and you probably wouldn't want to marry her. Put another way: comparing the 690SM to a KLR650 is like comparing a Rally car to a Subaru Forester. Both are legitimate but they aren't comparable.
I thoroughly enjoyed my 5-plus months and nearly 9000 trouble-free miles on a KTM 690SM. I would have ridden it until summer of 2008 but for the deer incident. On January 2, 2008, I hit a deer near Disappointment Valley in western Colorado while riding my KTM 690SM on a winter trip to Monument Valley. I was traveling fast. The deer came from nowhere. The deer's head hit my headlight, shattering a handlebar fairing, destroying all plastic up front, wiping out instruments and even busting the ignition lock assembly. The body of the deer caught the right corner of the fuel tank, breaking it off. Altogether, over $1500 damage. I didn't fall but I did kill the deer and scatter bike parts all over the highway. Fortunately, the impact was above the front wheel. There was no damage to forks or frame. This wouldn't have taken so long to repair but my favorite motorcycle dealership, Davis Service Center of Montrose, CO, was on the verge of becoming a KTM dealer and I chose to wait until they could order my parts. Since I was thinking of getting a KLR the summer of 2008 anyway, it seemed appropriate to get one immediately and take my time repairing the KTM.
I've had five earlier KLR650's. Inexpensive to begin with, the fact they come with a big fuel tank, adequate seat (for me, not everyone) and large luggage rack makes the KLR650 a real bargain. It's roomy, comfortable and suitable for long trips. Power is marginal for aggressive riders yet the KLR650 can cruise all day at 80MPH. Although heavy compared to real dirt bikes, it's light compared to other adventure touring bikes. (The specs are misleading. The 2008 KLR weighs less than 20 pounds more than the previous model, not the 50 pounds more a comparison of old and new specs would indicate.) This long-time functional favorite was improved significantly for 2008 and now has better brakes, better suspension, better seat, more weather protection, bigger luggage rack and a host of detail changes and improvements that make it look less dated and more expensive.
There were alternatives. The Suzuki DL650 is enough more motorcycle than a KLR650 to make it an even better bargin but I wanted to ride some interesting and sometimes gnarly unpaved roads. I'm approaching 70 years of age and find the weight of the DL650 somewhat intimidating. I have a friend who does seemingly impossible things on a DL650, but he is 30 years younger and a more skillful rider. I like the DR650 Suzuki better than a KLR but for the small tank, hard seat and lack of weather protection or luggage rack. I've converted the DR650 for adventure touring successfully but never liked the mismatched parts look, especially the aftermarket plastic fuel tanks.
Opinion
Initial impressions of the 2008 KLR650—January 2008
Idling in the driveway it's the same old garden-tractor sound. Once rolling it's a very different motorcycle. I've read a lot about the 2008 KLR650 from press releases, initial impressions, full tests and even that pinnacle of misinformation: Internet forums. Early on it was apparent the press release and specs were poorly written and contained errors (why claim the dry weight was 50 pounds greater than the previous model when the difference was less than 20 pounds?), glaring omissions (why did they initially not mention the 2-piston front brake caliper, something we all had wanted?) and misleading information (the usual hype). I'm hearing the owner's manual has mistakes. A thumbs down to Kawasaki for not doing some serious proof reading. Test impressions were all over the board but most testers said the bike was improved—some said improved substantially, some said not enough. Nevertheless, I was not prepared for how different this bike feels on the road after owning five of the previous model. A big thumbs up to Kawasaki for doing an exemplary job of making the KLR650 look and feel so much more expensive with only a modest increase in price. The difference is substantial and, as they say, greater than the sum of the parts. Now that I've ridden and examined one, I believe Kawasaki did all the right things.
As I saw it, after 21 years of production with minimal changes, Kawasaki had three choices with the KLR: drop it, modify it or replace it. I expected them to drop it as they had already done in Europe. Like the Concours, they could have introduced a different machine and called it a KLR but such a machine would likely have moved towards the BMW GS or V-Strom and been bigger, heavier and much more expensive, thus abandoning the KLR's special niche in the market place. I didn't think they could or would make significant improvements to the old machine without a big price increase. But they did, or so it seems to me.
Again, they had choices: they could have made the KLR more dirt-worthy or more road-worthy. They chose the latter, the correct choice in my opinion. There are no shortage of better dirt bikes but all are less suitable for adventure touring. The KLR650 was always everyman's adventure tourer, unique for offering long range and comfort in a relatively light-weight and inexpensive motorcycle capable of cruising all day on tarmac or wandering far from paved roads. It was always my kind of motorcycle. I understand it is not everyone's kind of motorcycle. But if you liked the old KLR and have reservations about the new one, at least get a ride on one before making up your mind. Nothing you read, including this, will be a substitute for your own impressions.
My big surprise was how the 2008 KLR looks and feels. I can't be sure how I think a bike looks from seeing one on a showroom floor. In my garage or on my driveway it becomes more personal. I like the look of the 2008 KLR650. The road feel is not similar to earlier models at all. It feels planted now. It also feels even bigger and heavier but "bigness" has always been one reason the KLR650 excels as a comfortable middleweight adventure tourer. The suspension, with apparently modest changes, is not similar in feel to earlier models. It's now firm but compliant. The front end has completely different habits. When I tried to induce a wobble at 60MPH, hands on the bars or off, the bike resisted as surely as any good-tracking motorcycle. Better than earlier models with a fork brace. Wind protection is as good as I expect from this type of motorcycle. Air hits about the middle of my visor. Noise is acceptable and turbulence mild. No significant amount of air enters the bottom of my helmet, important in the sub-freezing temperatures I often ride. The KLR protects my legs well also, much like a V-Strom. In fact, I guess my initial reaction is to say it feels like a V-Strom with half an engine and 80 pounds less weight. The look from the cockpit reveals nothing that reminds me of previous KLRs. The seat is very different in feel and much improved although I realize some people are never happy with a stock seat or windscreen. The engine seems smoother; the mirrors no longer blur. The power, as before, is modest—inadequate for keeping pace on the open road with fast-riding buddies on big GS's and V-Stroms but still capable of cruising all day at 80MPH. For many the power is adequate; for a few it is not.
NOTE: Generally speaking, if you want significantly more power from a given displacement you have to tune for increased RPM at the cost of less power at low RPM. My 653.7cc new-generation LC4 KTM (690 model) is rated 64HP at the crank. It's awesome from 4500 to 7000 RPM but unhappy pulling hard under 4000 RPM. The 651cc KLR is rated at about 45HP at the crank but takes the throttle quite happily from 2000 to 4000 RPM. Guess which one is the easiest to ride slow? Guess which one is the most fun in a fast, twisty paved canyon? You have to know your priorities.
As with most carburetor-equipped big singles, KLR fuel mileage can vary considerably depending upon how and where it's ridden. Fuel mileage can vary from high-30's to low-50's, the difference being determined mostly by the rider's right wrist.
On paper, the 2008 KLR650 seems to have only minimal improvements yet I find the reality somewhat different. The new 2008 KLR650 doesn't look like a KLR, doesn't feel like a KLR and only sounds like a KLR when it idles. I think Kawasaki did exactly the right thing. If only they had designated an engineer to write or edit the press release, specs and owner's manual.
After the first 3000 miles—March 2008
I really like this 2008 KLR650. So much so I feel compelled to mention factors that might cause me to perceive a motorcycle differently from how other riders might. Namely, age. I'm 69 years old and surely that makes a difference. Not that my riding skills have suffered; I'm probably faster on pavement and gravel roads than ever before and I'm loose, relaxed and confident—important characteristics in my opinion. But age has diminished my monetary resources and mechanical skill and it does influence the manner in which I perceive myself on a motorcycle. I'm very comfortable on the non-exotic, practical, reliable, functional and fun KLR650. I don't want to call it an old man's motorcycle. It's everyman's motorcycle. Nevertheless, I believe it to be a good choice for an older rider, even one with a tendency towards aggressive riding. Somehow I feel being on my KTM 690SM is boasting, even if I do ride it rather well. I'm wallpaper on the KLR and I'm comfortable with that. I certainly recognize the 690SM as superior to the KLR650 in all things relating to performance but it will always be someone else’s bike to me while the KLR is mine, the 2008 both an old friend and something new. I really like it. It's been my habit to ride a lot and change motorcycles often to broaden the experience but there will be a "last motorcycle" and I can easily imagine mine being a KLR650, even if not this one.
I've re-read my initial impressions above and all were valid. If anything, I'm even more impressed after 3000 miles of all kinds of riding except unpaved roads (after all, we have been having one of the worst winters in years). If anything I've said before needs amending, it may be my statements about power. I now believe this new KLR is faster than the old KLR. Several incidents have led to this belief; one stands out. On a recent ride, following a friend on an R1200GS Adventure, we cruised at mostly 80+MPH with some stretches indicating 90+MPH, even riding into a gusty quartering wind at 4000 to 7000 feet elevation. At one point, passing a big 18-wheeler on a downgrade, I saw 105MPH indicated. I'm not sure I've ever seen 105MPH indicated on a KLR before and this is my sixth one. I didn't have my GPS unit along but prior testing indicated the usual 7-9% error at 70 indicated which means I was probably approaching a true 100 MPH—pretty rare among honest KLR riders at our elevations. I think the new fairing on the 2008 KLR may smooth the air flow. I first described what seemed to be higher top speeds on the 2008 KLR as "like it always had a tail wind." Whatever the reason, it's easier to keep up with fast highway-riding buddies on bigger motorcycles now.
I'm glad I bought this 2008 KLR650. I needed something inexpensive to ride after hitting a deer with my KTM and I expected to like the KLR well enough but I had no idea I would like it as much as I do.
After riding off pavement—Late March 2008
I now have several hours of riding unpaved desert roads, some a bit rough with loose rocks and sections of sand. The new 2008 KLR feels better, more capable, more stable than ever before. The suspension is a significant improvement, even with reduced travel. The engine pulls without protest from well under 2000 RPM in first gear. The stability at speed is impressive.
After the first 6000 miles—April 2008
I now have over 6000 miles on my 2008 KLR650 with a lot of hard pavement riding (several hours at 80 to 90MPH indicated) and a good bit of desert off-pavement including sand and steep, rocky 4WD roads. I've very pleased with how it works off pavement and find it pulls smoother from a lower RPM than the pre-2008 KLRs, negating the need for lower gearing on rough, rocky climbs. The suspension may have less travel but for me it works noticeably better than the pre-2008 KLR's. As I've said, pavement manners are considerably improved (given appropriate tires) and the seat is good for 12 hour days with few stops (apparently this isn't true for everyone).
On a recent trip, 1000 miles in 36 hours with over 200 miles off pavement, the 2008 KLR650 did not do well with my weight and a load of camping gear at speeds over 80MPH indicated and for hard cornering on pavement. I mounted new Michelin Anakees for this trip and I strongly disliked the front tire from the first mile. The front tire has no directional "instincts" at any speed, even with no load on the rear. The rear tire, possibly both, drift noticeably in corners at high speed, steep lean angles. These tires performed fine everywhere off pavement, even at 80MPH in loose gravel. Many people like Anakees; I find this pair unacceptable. I bought them from a discount tire dealer. Perhaps the tires were too long in a warehouse, especially the 90/90 21 front which I doubt is much in demand in an Anakee as I mostly see them on bikes with 19 inch front wheels.
After 9000 miles—June 2008
For the first couple hours of a morning ride the enjoyment is so intense I'm thinking this 2008 KLR650 is the perfect motorcycle. I can't imagine wanting anything else. By the end of the day when the pace has quickened and I've chased bigger bikes in twisty paved canyons at full throttle for 50 miles, the speedometer registering between 90 and 100MPH, contending with a little head shake in 90mph sweepers, I'm wishing for more power, better suspension and a wider front tire. But that's abusing the motorcycle. I can hardly fault it for being less than perfect when used beyond any design objectives or reasonable expectations. Hard riding means different things to different people. Not many people ride KLR650s like I just described, not even many of those who might claim they do. Such riders are plentiful on the forums but conspicuously absent on the roads. Any number of KLR riders ride rougher stuff than I do now that I'm near 70 years old but I'm faster on pavement than ever before. We compensate. Ridden realistically, only a nit picker could find much fault with the 2008 KLR650. Even at abusive speeds, head shake wasn't a problem until I installed Michelin Anakee tires. Now I've replaced the Anakees with Pirelli Scorpion ATs and the stable feeling on pavement has been restored. No one really needs to corner at speeds over 85MPH on a KLR. I could get my KTM 690SM off consignment -- it is well suited to such hard riding. The fact that I don't get the KTM off consignment means the many virtues of the KLR are important to me. Besides, it impresses (or at least surprises) people if I go fast on the KLR. I'm expected to go fast on the KTM. BTW: the speedometer on my 2008 KLR is 7-8% fast, not the 10% fast I hear frequently. I wonder how many of the riders claiming 10% fast actually checked. My 6 KLR650s were all 7-8% off. My latest DR650 was 10% off; my KTM690SM was dead accurate at 100MPH until I hit a deer and had to replace the speedometer, now it's 2% fast. The point is, you have to check. The easiest and probably the most accurate way is with a GPS unit. I have an inexpensive GPS unit and speed checks are the only thing I use it for.
Think positive:
Having seen a few forum members rant endlessly about the integrity of Kawasaki and the poor quality of the 2008 KLR650, I think its time for someone to present a positive perspective.
Most happy KLR owners don't post much on forums. Complainers often post daily. Before you let a few negative posts scare you, do the math. What percentage of the forum members are complaining. On one of the more negative forums, I found less than 1 tenth of 1 percent were seriously complaining. Yet I read a posting by an angry person who had never owned a KLR650 and credited the forum with informing him that Kawasaki was a lousy company and the KLR was junk.
In my opinion, Kawasaki listened to the complaints about the previous generation KLR650 and improved everything of significance that anyone ever complained about. Here's a few things I've noticed:
Much better stability and road feel. This I presume is due to different forks with larger diameter tubes, upgraded fork springs, revised linkage in the rear and upgraded rear spring (or maybe the spring is the same and only the linkage is different). The larger diameter wheel spokes may have helped as well. (Suspension upgrades, never required for many riders, are now needed even less).
New fairing and windscreen with noticeably improved protection. Better finish on the plastic. Windscreen fine for winter for me; still needs raising maybe 3 1/2 inches to keep bugs off my shield in summer. But that's me. The stock height is designed to provide a smooth airflow, not protect your head. Suitability varies according to rider height, torso length, posture and expectations. No way could they offer a tall windscreen that would suit a majority of buyers so the short screen is the correct stock screen in my opinion.
New attractive instruments carried by the fairing rather than the forks.
Improved dual bulb headlight. I rarely ride at night so this means little to me.
Very nice seat. The old seat was adequate for me but this one is much improved (no upgrade needed -- except for those people who are never satisfied).
Improved shift lever. The old one was prone to break at the weld if bent and straightened (no upgrade needed).
Redesigned hand guards. These are the first hand guards I've ever used that made a noticeable difference in winter hand temperature. All other hand guards I thought of as necessary shields to keep bugs off my gloves in summer. (No upgrade needed -- except for riders who expect to fall down and want lever protection).
Dual piston brake calipers. We wanted one on the front and got them on both ends. Of course, braking distance will be limited by the same narrow 21 inch front tire, as it was before, but the brakes feel better and that's all most people care about (no upgrade needed).
Self centering, push to cancel turn signal switch, a much appreciated change (no upgrade needed).
Less vibration. The vibration of the old KLR never bothered me but it did blur the mirrors. Now the mirrors do not blur (no expensive Honda mirror upgrade needed).
A redesigned balancer chain adjustment lever and new spring. The spring is said to be too long but I'll wait until the chain is noisy and then if it won't adjust, install a better spring from Eagle Mfg. & Engineering. NOTE: at a doohickey clinic at the 2008 Canyonlands Classic rally, I saw a 2008 KLR with 1000 miles opened up and the spring was indeed incapable of supporting adjustment. And no, it was never the cam chain tensioner as often erroneously reported. The cam chain tensioner is automatic and fool-proof except when absent minded mechanics forget to remove the spring before lifting the cams to replace shims during valve adjustment. Even then, it's no big deal if they know to remove the tensioner and reset the ratchet. (Upgrade no longer needed but the hard-core negativists will never believe it).
Bigger, better battery (but still not maintenance free). Holds a full charge now.
Blade-type fuses. A lot of owners changed them before (now no upgrade needed).
Modest but adequate power. At first, I didn't notice any more or less power compared to earlier models except perhaps between 2000 and 4000 RPM where it seemed to pull stronger and smoother. After the first 3000 miles I was certain the 2008 KLR also had either more power on top end, a higher top speed due to improved streamlining or both. On forums, I'm seeing members claim Kawasaki sacrificed low end torque for a little more power on top end. This is not true, or at least it isn't on mine and I can't believe mine is unique. Let's examine what Kawasaki claims to have done and what it seems like they did. Kawasaki says they changed the cam timing and modified the ports for enhanced low-end and top-end. This sounds like hype, even a contradiction. Truth is, the engine feels like the cam timing has been changed. In my opinion, it has a less crisp throttle response than earlier models. On the other hand, it runs much smoother than earlier KLR models at low RPM, will pull strongly from lower RPM, will even pull from as low a 1000 RPM. It's much harder to stall, thus making lower gearing less necessary for me. It may not actually make more power and torque at lower RPM but at least it will pull smoothly and this is what counts in the real world. This difference is more noticeable to me than the increase in top end which I also believe is true and probably comes from port changes. I first described this difference as like "always having a tail wind." The 2008 engine tuning is different and it feels different. Although the 2008 KLR does not make more HP on a dynamometer, sometimes even less if the tests can be believed, these differences nevertheless come across to the rider as increased performance at both ends with the bottom end the most significant. This of course presumes a stock motorcycle. Results could be different and not necessarily improved if the owner messed with intake, exhaust or jetting.
Many improved fasteners and details, too many to list and I've probably not noticed them all.
I liked the old KLR a lot and like the new one even better. Thank you Kawasaki for upgrading almost everything I would have suggested had you ask me what I would change. And thank you especially for increasing the price only $150. With all these changes precluding the need for upgrades, the new KLR650 is actually much less expensive than the old one. It's truly remarkable that you could make the KLR feel so much more expensive and refined for such a modest price increase. I guess it proves your engineers knew more than we did.
Accessories
Center Stand: installed SW-Motech center stand at 11,410 miles after a recent flat tire on a mountain unpaved road could have been difficult to repair had I not been riding with a friend young enough and strong enough to actually pick the KLR up (maybe the front wheel was still on the ground) and set it on a couple big rocks to get the rear wheel off the ground.
Tail trunk: after trying a couple tank bags I had handy and realizing the KLR front tire throws sand up on the tank and remembering that a previous KLR was the only bike I owned that got scratches on the tank from sand or small stones under the tank bag, I decided to mount a Givi tail trunk. This particular 36 liter scooter trunk has been out of production for several years. I bought it new but cheap on eBay and have used it on several motorcycles. It seems to be indestructible. It still looks good.
Tank bag: Old habits are hard to break. I first used a tank bag on a nearly new 1968 Triumph TR6 and I've used one on nearly every bike since. My 1968 Zundapp ISDT Replica even came with a leather tool bag on the tank from the factory. While it's true the KLR front wheel throws sand and pea gravel up on the fuel tank, I decided to use a tank bag anyway, primarily so I could move my 8 pounds of tools and tire repair stuff to the tank rather than the tail of an already tail-heavy motorcycle. There are many tank bag choices and I have used the popular ones but this time decided on something different, The Pine Flat" 11 Liter Expandable 4 Point Expandable Tank from RKA. This bag, less than half the 11 liter size when not expanded, is shaped for steeply sloped tanks and fits the KLR very well. In fact, it came with KLR mounting instructions. Four straps secure the bag tight to the tank. I've had RKA tank bags and tail bags before and have been pleased with service and quality. The price is inline with other tank bags of similar size and quality.
Side cases: Side cases are another habit hard to break. I especially like SW-Motech side racks and Pelican Cases but wanted something smaller, lighter and more streamlined for the 2008 KLR and besides, I've always liked top-loaders. While I was pondering the possibility of yet another set of Givi E21 cases, wondering what rack to use as these small cases do not completely cover the mounting plate on SW-Motech racks, the pondering ended when I saw Happy Trails was offering side racks for the 2008 KLR650 with Givi mounting hardware and E21 cases for $399.
Voltage Indicator: when one uses heated accessories on motorcycles with questionable charging capabilities, it is essential to eliminate guesswork by installing a charging indicator. I wear a Gerbing's heated jacket and heated gloves when the temperature is much below 40 degrees. I'm not yet sure what this new KLR can handle. A charging indicator is the only way to be sure the charging system is keeping up as I ride. For this application, I chose a $26.95 Heads-up Voltage Indicator from Custom Dynamics. I ordered directly from SDC and the product was shipped promptly with a reasonable postage charge. This device uses one small bulb with a combination of three colors and a flashing or steady light to indicate whether the system is overcharging, undercharging or within the correct range. Without this light I wouldn't know if the charging system was keeping up. I've already used my heated gear but only at low power. Now I'll know what I'm doing. I installed the small flush-mount light in the dash, just to the right of the instruments. The micro processor is out of sight, forward of the instrument cluster. I used snap-splicers to tap into the wires of a dash illumination light so the indicator will only be on when the ignition is on. I only had to remove the windscreen for this installation. Flashing Green - Voltage Above 15.25 VDC - This prolonged over-voltage condition can destroy batteries, especially gel-cells. Steady Green - Above 12.9. Steady Amber - Above 12.6. Steady Red - Above 12.1. Flashing Red - Below 12 VDC. What this means: if I see yellow while cruising, I reduce the current draw with my Gerging's heat controller until it's steady green. I usually see red or flashing red when idling. I sometimes turn my heated clothing off when I slow for a town. A 74 mile ride in teen-temperatures confirms the 2008 KLR indeed has more electrical output. I can run my Gerbings heated Jacket liner and gloves full power when cruising with high beam off. I was limited to only 1/2 power on late pre-2008 KLRs.
MRA windscreen: this German manufactured windscreen from Twisted Throttle seemed from the description to meet my functional and esthetic requirements. I want a screen that retains the original lines. I want the least windscreen I can get that will keep bugs off my visor in summer and not cause excessive buffeting. I'm not looking for a still air pocket. I can accept some wind noise (it's a motorcycle after all). The stock screen was adequate for me this winter because it provided a reasonably smooth air stream high enough not to enter the bottom of my helmet but not high enough to keep bugs off my visor when spring comes. I reproduced the size and shape of the MRA windscreen with cardboard and duct tape for a test ride before ordering. I expected the height to be about 3 1/2 inches above the stock shield -- marginally low but perhaps acceptable. Unfortunately the measurements given for the MRA screen are misleading; height means total height including the invisible portion used for mounting. The MRA screen installed is only 2 1/2 inches taller than stock. I should have been suspicious; the description failed to say how much taller the MRA screen was over stock. The apparent quality is good enough, similar to any name-brand aftermarket windscreen, not as detailed or nicely finished as the stock shield. For example, the stock shield has a molded bead around the screen; the MRA has a press-on black vinyl bead. The stock screen is recessed at the lower edges for a flush mounting; the MRA screen is not. Both characteristics -- no molded bead, no recessed mounting -- are typical of aftermarket screens. It may be acceptable. I need to try it in more situations such as strong, gusty headwinds in a favorite canyon and after the bugs come out. Since taking the picture, I've removed the black vinyl bead.
Update: I found the MRA screen attractive but functionally unsatisfactory; too low and raked back to alter the airflow significantly and too close to my face for comfort. I needed something taller and more upright. I tried an extension made from an old face shield attached to the OEM screen with nylon bolts for a 3 1/2 inch extension. Not tall enough. I'm currently running the MRA screen with the bottom third cut off and the top part attached to the OEM screen with for nylon bolts for a 5 inch extension. The mounting is such that the screen is more upright than the MRA alone was. I find the performance of this setup more or less acceptable. It meets my original expectations although now that I've gotten the height acceptable I'm thinking it needs to be wider. I've ridden to Moab UT and back with this setup in cold, gusty head and crosswinds. The airflow is above my visor and presumably so will the bugs be come spring. Wind noise is moderate and turbulence mild. Unfortunately, I find it unattractive. I don't know where to go from here. If I have an opportunity to examine a Cee Baily setup for the 2008 KLR650, I might consider it but after disappointment with design and mounting of a previous DR650 Cee Baily windscreen I am cautious about buying their product without seeing it first. The Cee Baily windscreen for the 2008 KLR650 is more upright and much wider although this results in an odd shape that, in my opinion, looks out of place with the streamlined KLR fairing.
Spring Update: This modified windscreen is not keeping bugs off my visor but I've otherwise grown to like it and have no idea for a better solution that I find esthetically acceptable.
Tail box, tank bag and side cases.
Picture 1 = key on, engine off, voltage indicator on.
Picture 2 = key on, voltage indicator off.
MRA windscreen
Perhaps the final version: top part of MRA attached to Painted stock screen. I may keep it if it deflects at least 80% of summer bugs from my helmet shield but I doubt it would satisfy many riders.
2008 KLR650 Owner's Log
July 6, 2008: 11866 miles. Changed oil & filter, fresh air filter, checked battery which still did not need water added (so different from earlier KLRs with batteries that needed service often), general checkup and cleaning in preparation for trading July 11 for reasons explained elsewhere. One thing for sure, those reasons have nothing to do with any fault of this 2008 KLR which is the best KLR I've owned yet. The battery not needing service reminds me how many ways this KLR is better than old ones. I can't think of anything about this KLR I don't like better than previous models. I hear people say they they don't see any reason to trade. Some say they like the old model better. I can understand that. I even felt that way a bit myself when I bought this one. However, after nearly 12,000 miles, I'm betting no one who has had both would go back to the pre-2008.
June 29, 2008: 11,640 miles. Gateway for coffee and a scone, then back through Unaweep Canyon to unpaved Divide Road. South on Divide Road to unpaved Delta-Nucla Road and home. About 100 miles of dirt and gravel to test the knobby rear tire described below. Not sure I could tell any difference from the street-oriented tires I normally use. In fact, I would say the KTM 690SM I recently owned worked better on the same gravel roads with 17 inch wheels and sport bike tires. My next best fast ride on these roads is a toss up between a Suzuki DL650 V-Strom or a Suzuki DR650 with street-oriented dual-sport tires. A BMW R1150GS with Metzeler Tourance tires worked well too. The KLR is not the best for fast riding on gravel roads but it's good enough. I just don't want a knobby. This Pirelli MT21 works okay on pavement and okay on gravel but I don't see any reason for wanting it and it's already half worn out at a little over 500 miles.
June 26, 2008: 11,410 miles. Installed SW-Motech center stand at 11,410 miles after a recent flat rear tire on a mountain unpaved road could have been difficult to repair had I not been riding with a friend young enough and strong enough to actually pick the KLR up (maybe the front wheel was still on the ground) and set it on a couple big rocks to get the rear wheel off the ground.
June 22, 2008: 11,335 miles. Gateway for lunch. I was curious to see how the Pirelli MT21 rear tire (mounted because it was the only tire in my size in stock) would perform on familiar canyon roads. After I got used to the idea of having a knobby for the first time in nearly 40 years, I was riding more or less my usual brisk canyon pace. I have nothing negative to say about this tire. I assume I should not challenge other bikes in the canyon now or try to keep up with a couple fast friends not on knobbies. I further assume I should be extra careful around wet surfaces, paint, cattle guards, tar snakes and all the other places we learn to be careful of. Other than that, it looks like the MT21 will be business as usual. Surely it will work well off pavement. If it didn't, that would be irony.
June 20, 2008: 11,158 miles. Home from June 19 Moab to Telluride 450 mile ride, desert, high plateau and mountains, 250 miles unpaved. Made it to Montrose on flat rear tire (explained at link above). Davis Service Center installed new Pirelli MT21 with new tube at 11,118 miles.
June 15, 2008: 10,688 miles. Oil & filter change. Prep for big Moab-Telluride mostly off-pavement ride next week.
June 14, 2008: 10,650 miles. Gateway for lunch. Rode John Brown Canyon and Taylor Flats road and other roads to Paradox, then over the Uncompahgre from Naturita to Delta. Taylor Flats road open and dry.
June 12, 2008: 10,312 miles. Checked out a few passes for the 2008 annual 9-pass ride. Four passes still closed by snow.
June 10, 2008: 10,002 miles. Lunch with Randy and Josie of 141 Diner fame at their new home: Lake Vallecito Country Market & Mexican Food northeast of Durango. This was a 460 mile loop ride, mostly mountains, some unpleasant traffic and high winds with gusts to 45MPH (according to National Weather Service). KLR performed flawlessly and handled high cross-winds well as have all my KLRs before. Cruised at mostly 70 to 80MPH indicated with passing speeds at 90 or above (with tail wind).
June 8, 2008: 9472 miles. Rode to Gateway for lunch. Stability restored. Side cases had no negative effect. Tires did the trick. After lunch, rode 45 miles of Dolores Canyon. Stopped again at Outpost. Met Canadian motorcycle Training Instructor Peter from Canada riding VFR800. Mike showed up on DL650, Ken on R1200GS Adventure, me on the KLR650 -- what a varied assortment of motorcycles. We were all headed towards Grand Junction so rode together, single file, very fast pace, further confirming the wiggles are gone. Good ride.
June 7, 2008: 9249 miles. Removed side cases and rode Black Mesa. All is well. Feel of stability restored. No waggles even at 100MPH indicated in fast down-slope sweeper.
June 3, 2008: 9100 miles. Changed oil & filter. Mounted, balanced and installed 2 new Pirelli Scorpion ATs. Everything about high-speed stability and feel seems restored to levels I praised the first 5000 miles.
May 31, 2008: 8844 miles. Back from Moab Rally. Now to install new Pirelli Scorpion AT's. If that doesn't cure my high-speed handling problems (Pirelli Scorpion AT's have worked well on this bike before) I'll be stumped. I've always thought it was the tires as it started with installation of Michelin Anakees but I've checked everything else I could think of just in case.
May 19, 2008: 8343 miles. Back from Muley Point, Utah.
May 14, 2008: 7536 miles. Replaced unstable, potentially dangerous, more than 1/2 worn at 2500 miles Anakee front tire with half worn but decent handling OEM original Dunlop. Wish I knew why these Anakees work so poorly when so many people like them. I'm assuming a specific fault with my tires. Checked steering head bearing adjustment but no problem there. A test ride suggests improvement.
May 13, 2008: 7525 miles. Valve clearance check. Both intakes: .007 or within range on the loose side of middle. Both exhaust: .008 or middle of the range. No changes. 2008 manual says first valve check at 15,000 miles, then every 15,000 miles but I was curious as the pre-2008 manual said first valve check at 600 miles then every 6000 miles. Who knows? Kawasaki claimed head work on the 2008. Maybe they used harder valve seats or something or maybe improved manufacturing tolerances.
May 11, 2008: 7509 miles. Gateway for lunch. Met a guy with a 2008 KLR650. We each had over 7,000 miles on our bike. We swapped opinions for awhile. He had a serious oil burner but liked the bike well enough he was going to fix it and keep it. My jetting, airbox and exhaust are stock. He had opened-up air box, changed needle and main jet and installed a 2bros. exhaust. I suggested we ride Dolores Canyon for a comparison. We rode hard and fast. I saw 100MPH indicated at least once. His bike had more top end. He said maybe 2 or 3 MPH. When we headed back we swapped bikes and again rode hard. I saw 103 indicated once on his bike and thought it felt crisper in the mid-range. It was too loud for me. What really frustrated me was, his IRC knobby (okay, not a knobby; probably a GP110 but not looking like something you would want to go fast on) front tire (he had a Metzeler Tourance on the rear) worked better and gave me more confidence in fast corners than the Michelin Anakee front tire on mine. I really dislike the Anakees but there must be some explanation as many people like them. This was his last ride before pulling the head and sending it off for work at a shop with an impeccable reputation. He will also install the 685cc barrel, piston and rings, a proven modification that I've heard nothing bad about. If Dyno results are accurately reported, this should be worth about 10 more HP at the rear wheel. We plan to get together again after installation and break-in for another comparison. This guy (I never remember names until I see them in print) also has an LC4 KTM and a DL650 V-Strom so our motorcycle habits are similar.
May 7, 2008: 7214 miles. Montrose via twisty, unpaved Peach Valley Road, home by way of Black Mesa (CO92).
May 4, 2008: 7061 miles. Remarkable coincidence: A couple weeks ago, Jeff Libby of Colorado Springs found this web site, called, asked about the John Brown Canyon road from Gateway to Moab. Today, around noon while I was refueling at the Outpost in Gateway, two riders pulled up asking for directions to John Brown Canyon. Subsequent conversation inspired one rider to ask my name. He was Jeff Libby. Needless to say, we all believed the chances of us meeting like that were slim indeed. I offered to lead them to Moab the back way. Jeff offered to buy my lunch. We had an enjoyable conversation and a good ride. Jeff rides a BMW F650GS; David Hulsen of Kansas City was riding a KLR650. They promised to send pictures and I'll post them when I get them. I didn't have my camera.
April 27, 2008: 6601 miles. Had lunch at Gateway, then checked John Brown Canyon and Gateway-Moab road. Road dry. Up high, snow along sides of road showed signs of having been plowed. I didn't know they ever did that but I've heard there is some uranium mining activity up that way so maybe that explains it. Tried Taylor Flats road and after only 1/2 mile in on north end, road disappeared under deep, trackless snow. I have no idea when it will be open but I suspect it will be later than normal this year.
April 19, 2008: 6208 miles. Lunch at Gateway, 1st fast ride on Michelin Anakees in familiar Canyon along Dolores River. It was windy and gusty -- NWS predicted gusts of 45MPH. The Michelin Anakees slipped some in tighter 80+ corners but it was drifting rather than sudden breakaway. Nevertheless, I didn't like it as I normally don't ride that way. Chewed the rear tire up just a little on the edges and it can't be power. I'm also disturbed I'm wearing the front tire closer to the edge of tread than I normally do which means it's performing differently. I worry that I may be pushing too hard. Sure don't like these tires.
April 17, 2008: 5915 miles. Changed oil and filter, cleaned air filter, general inspection, removed foot peg feelers after bending one on a pavement corner in Utah. The toe of my boot is feeler enough. When I set the static sag, I had to use max preload on the rear spring to compensate for my 190 lbs plus clothing and gear. With a load of camping gear and no more preload, the spring was too soft for fast pavement. The excellent high-speed stability of the 2008 KLR was missing on this trip. Didn't slow me down but I don't like the feel. I did have a heavy load: normal camping gear, maybe a gallon and a half of water, a glass bottle of wine and a wooden Kermit folding chair. At speeds under 80 there was no problem but I don't always ride under 80. The Michelin Anakee tires may be causing part or all of my complaint as I haven't liked them on pavement from the first mile. I had no problem with either end off pavement with all the same load, even when the road got rough. I only bottomed the rear a couple times and I take the blame for that: I hit a couple washouts too hard and fast.
April 15, 2008: 5913 miles. Back from two-day hard ride. I dislike the Michelin Anakee tires I mounted for this trip. On the highway they howl, vibrate, ride rough and the front tire never seems to know where it's going. Oddly enough, they worked fine off-pavement, even at 80MPH on gravel. Just my opinion. Many riders think the Anakees are great? The Pirelli Scorpion AT's I had before were infinitely better on pavement and just as good or better off pavement. Unfortunately, I wore them out in 4000 miles but that's not representative of what other riders get.
April 8, 2008: 4915 miles. Cleaned air filter, checked battery (still full), mounted and balanced two new Michelin Anakees. Both tires slightly out of round, way out of balance. Stiff, very difficult to mount. Rear tire beads too thick for narrow KLR rim making valve stem protrusion nearly impossible until beads seated. (I prefer a 120/90 rear but not available in Anakee -- used 130/80 as recommended in owner's manual.) Initial test ride impressions not favorable, Tires noisy, vibration noticeable, imprecise steering. Brakes, though, seemed noticeably improved. I had deliberately over-inflated -- maybe 30 front, 35 rear. Lowered the pressure to 25 front, 30 rear and rest of test ride felt more "normal."
April 6, 2008: 4839 miles. Unaweep and Dolores Canyons with lunch at Outpost Deli. Pirelli Scorpion tires now have over 3500 miles on them. the rear could probably make another 500 miles (for comparison, that would be more than twice what I get from OEM rear tires on KLRs). The front tire is beginning to track squirrelly when upright. The outer blocks, both sides, are worn at least 1/8 inch more than the inner two rows of blocks (the OEM front tire did the same). I've yet to find a tire for a 21 inch front wheel that can deal with hard cornering (wish I had a 19 inch wheel and wider tire). I have a new set of Michelin Anakees to mount before an overnight trip to south-central Utah April 13-14.
March 29, 2008: 4473 miles. Visited Jason Maynard and Jeremy Lownes and party near the White Wash, Ruby Ranch area of Utah at a most unusual and beautiful desert camp site.
March 26, 2008: 4160 miles. Kyle and Mike from Montrose, both on DL650 V-Stroms, rode to Cedaredge. We checked the static sag on both DL650s, had a good lunch at the Apple Shed in Cedaredge then rode over Grand Mesa on Senic CO65, down Plateau Canyon to I70, east to De Beque, then back north on the twisty De Beque Cutoff and back over Grand Mesa. Beautiful day, warm weather, roads clean enough for spirited riding, a gusty wind for added fun.
March 23, 2008: 3928 miles. Met Ken and Mike in Grand Junction. Rode from Glade Park to the Dolores River. Both ways, that's 50 or 60 miles of unpaved road including graded gravel, deep, crooked ruts in dried dirt, a little soft sand or silt, some rocks and ledges (but not nearly as much rock as prior rides on same road). Rough, not technical but demanding attention and suspension-punishing at a brisk speed. This was my first off-pavement experience of significance with the 2008 KLR650 and, like my impression of its paved road manners, once again I'm amazed at how much it is improved. The suspension changes seem modest on paper but work wonderfully well even with the much-discussed less travel. I'm very happy with how stable and secure it feels. Our lunch spot along the Dolores River.
March 19, 2008: 3631 miles. I've been busy putting the KTM back together and riding it several hundred miles to insure all is right. Rode the KLR to Davis Service Center with KTM spare parts, owner's manual, etc. Can't keep both bikes. Will now sell the KTM on consignment. Sorry to see it go.
March 9, 2008: 3555 miles. Met Ken (R1200GS Adventure) & Mike (new DL650) at Gateway. We rode CO141 in Dolores Canyon to Nucla, Naturita and back again. Beautiful day. Dry, clean pavement.
March 7, 2008: 3195 miles. Montrose. Lunch with Billy then home via Blue Mesa Reservoir and CO92 for my first Black Mesa ride of the year. Gusty winds, blowing snow, some wet road on US50, mostly dry roads but huge amount of sand & pea gravel on the pavement in many places on CO92. Fun anyway. I parked in the snow for these pictures: Blue Mesa DamHermit's Rest Viewpoint
March 2, 2008: 3044 miles. Oil and filter change. No perceptible oil loss between changes despite some high-speed runs. Pulled the battery to check level and all the cells were where I topped them off when I got it. What a surprise as the old KLRs seemed to always be low. Checked static sag. Front on the stiff side of acceptable, rear below the soft side of acceptable after cranking in all 5 clicks of preload (and increasing rebound damping). This is how it was on the old KLRs: firm in the front, soft in the rear for a 180-200 lb. rider. I know, people were always complaining the front springs were too soft but they were wrong unless they weighed over 200 lbs. They never checked static sag or understood long travel suspension. I weigh 40 lbs. more than the 150 lb. design objective and have a 15 lb. tail box with tools on the rear rack. The tools alone weigh 8 lbs. I guess I'll have to move the tools to a tank bag. That might get me close to acceptable on rear sag. On the other hand, if it doesn't bottom out very often, it's okay but I don't like using all the preload. I won't know until spring when I ride bad roads. A short test ride on rough pavement indicates the rear is behaving well so I guess I got the rebound damping in the ball park. The manual describes "clicks" but I never found any clicks.
March 1, 2008: 3040 miles. Met Ken (R1200GS Adventure and Mike (DL650) at Gateway. Rode CO141, CO90 (Paradox Valley), UT46 to La Sal Jct. Where else can one ride 100 miles of twisty pavement thru beautiful canyons and valleys with no towns and almost no traffic on a mid-day Saturday. US191 to Moab for lunch, UT128 (River Road) home to Grand Junction and on the Cedaredge for me.
February 27, 2008: 2669 miles. Unaweep Canyon and lunch at the 141 Diner (which may close for some indefinite period on 2/29/2008). Joined there by Mike on his FJR1300. After lunch we rode the loop -- Naturita, Norwood, Dallas Divide, Ridgway and a stop at DSC in Montrose. Beautiful day, great ride.
February 19, 2008: 2328 miles. Met Mike (New 2008 DL650) near Grand Junction and we rode to Moab. Had lunch and a good visit with Fred, Arrowhead Motorsports. Back home via Moab-to-Cisco river road which UDOT was reporting as icy in spots but wasn't. Over 100 miles of Interstate on this trip. The 2008 KLR seems happy cruising long stretches at 80+MPH indicated. Very comfortable. Mileage dropped to 42MPG, about the mileage I would have expected under similar circumstances from earlier KLRs I've owned.
February 17, 2008: 1985 miles. Rode Unaweep Canyon. Met Ken (R1200GS Adventure) and Mike (brand new 2008 DL650 V-Strom (to replace a 2006 with well over 40,000 miles and no problems but in another 2 years it would have had 80K to 90K miles)) at Gateway Canyons. Lunch at Outpost Deli. Rode on south to Naturita, refueled and returned by same route. Beautiful day, nice ride.
February 12, 2008: 1614 miles. Rode Unaweep Canyon -- twice. Rode to Gateway, had lunch, rode towards home, met Mike near Whitewater, rode back to Gateway for coffee, then rode home. Very nice day. Surprises: had to brake tire-squealing hard to avoid a turkey; on the 2nd pass through a blind, fast righthander there was a small boulder on my line where no rock was the first pass. I like the new Pirelli tires but no surprise there. Earlier I stopped at Davis Service Center in Montrose to measure a new rear OEM tire on a KLR650. Here's how it compares to the new Pirelli tires: Pirelli Scorpion 120/90 = 25 3/4 inch diameter; Dunlop OEM 130/80 = 25 1/4 inch diameter. That's only 1/4 inch difference in ride height.
February 11, 2008: Went out to the garage to ride and the rear tire was flat. Had a piece of horseshoe nail in it. What better place to have a flat but home in the garage. The tire had only about 300 miles of wear left. I decided to buy new tubes and mount my new tires: Pirelli MT90 A/T 90/90S-21 TT Front and Pirelli MT90 A/T 120/90S-17 TT Rear. I know, the original rear tire was a 130/80 but I've always thought a 130 tire was too wide for the 2.5 inch rim. Tire manufacturers who print recommended rim widths seem to think so too. I've used a 120/90 on a KLR before. The load range is more than adequate. The DR650 comes with a 120/90-17.
February 10, 2008: 1310 miles. Rode Unaweep Canyon, met Jerry (DL650), Ken (R1200GS Adventure) and Mike (FJR1300) at the Outpost in Gateway, had a nice visit and lunch at the Outpost Deli, rode to the Flume, long stretches of ice in shady spots in the canyon along the Dolores River, otherwise brisk pace, good ride, beautiful day.
January 31, 2008: 1074 miles. Teen-temperature ride to test MRA windscreen (see accessories above) and charging indicator. Undecided on windscreen but charging indicator confirms the 2008 KLR indeed has more electrical output. I can run my Gerbings heated Jacket liner and gloves full power when cruising, only 1/2 power on late pre-2008 KLRs. My stock rear tire is 2/3 to 3/4 worn out. How is it possible that some people can claim 6,000 miles or more?
January 26, 2008: 1000 miles (with zero on the tenths). And that's with no extra jog or detour to make it happen. Had lunch in Montrose with Billy, then rode to Ridgway and the summit of Dallas Divide and back home. Pulled fine on the climb up Dallas Divide. So far, this KLR seems to have perfect carburetion at the altitudes I ride (today 5000 to 9000 feet) like my first KLR, a '99 model. Even the idle mixture seems fine so far with no popping on deceleration. You can bet I'll leave it alone until I have a reason to change something.
January 23, 2008: 846 miles. Rode the CO141 canyons. Lunch at Gateway. It was great riding a favorite road. The 2008 KLR650 continues to impress me in the canyons even with modest power, rearward weight bias and skinny 21 inch front tire on cold asphalt.
January 20, 2008: 549 miles. Land's End Road; Grand Mesa, Colorado; elevation 11,000 feet more or less; 25oF; beautiful day.
January 15, 2008: 429 miles. Rode Unaweep Canyon today. Twice. Rode to Gateway, had lunch, headed home, emerging from the mouth of the canyon near Whitewater I met friend Mike on his DL650, rode back to Gateway, had coffee, rode home, all at a modest pace appropriate for break-in. Back home, I changed the oil and filter. I experienced no oil loss or consumption and my oil filter had no visible metallic particles.
January 8, 2008: 0 miles. Purchased new.
(2008 KLR650 owner log entries start above and work up to newest date.)
2007 KLR650 and earlier models
NOTE: the comments and opinions below were relevant for the pre-2008 KLR650.
Don't assume this information relates beyond 2007 unless specifically noted.
—Verle Nelson, Cedaredge Colorado
The Kawasaki KLR650 is unique, a motorcycle of choice for riders seeking reasonable comfort for the long haul, moderate weight, capability on a variety of road surfaces, a big fuel tank for long range and all for a modest price. The KLR is a friendly motorcycle. It's not really a dirtbike or enduro and not even a dual sport if competition is one of the sports. Although some owners have used it as all of these things, success has been a matter of strength, skill and determination. But the KLR is a multi-purpose motorcycle and it is a reasonable adventure-touring mount. Meet someone riding from Alaska to South America or around the world and they will likely be riding either a BMW GS or a Kawasaki KLR. So think of the KLR as half or more of a GS at about one third the price — a bargain since it weighs 200 pounds less than the R1150GS yet holds more fuel and goes places the GS shouldn't. This is not to say that GS owners should have bought a KLR; it is to say that a lot of people can be happy with a KLR and save around $10,000. Think of the KLR as the two-wheeled equivalent of a Subaru Forester: inexpensive, reliable, capable and attractively ugly.
The original style KLR 650 was been built from 1986 to 2007 in a variety of colors and trim but with modest mechanical changes. Not surprisingly, it became a cult bike, as motorcycles often do when they remain in production for many years mostly unchanged. The KLR is the subject of several Internet forums with thousands of members and nearly everything that can be said about the KLR has been worn to a frazzle. Most of the praise, if it sounds realistic, is probably true; many, but not all, of the complaints are exaggerated.
My personal experience with the pre-2008 Kawasaki KLR650
Modifications and technical information
Despite what you may hear or read on Internet email lists, the KLR doesn't need many modifications. The engine, although a design more than twenty years old, is a double overhead cam, 4-valve, balance shaft design comparable to other modern 650 singles. The power output may be rated 5-7 HP less at the crank than the latest BMW F650 single, but the KLR is 50 pounds lighter making the difference in real-world performance somewhat insignificant. With the exception of the LC4 KTM Adventure, the KLR's 6.1 gallon fuel tank has no match in a similar motorcycle. The KLR is roomy, comfortable, has great luggage capacity and a suspension that works well for anything the bike was intended to do. So, how does a rider improve the KLR? By personalizing the KLR, of course. Each rider has likes and preferences based on experience and habits. Here's what I prefer:
The short, stock KLR windscreen with "flipped lip" can cause noisy turbulence and buffeting, depending on rider height and posture. As a six-foot tall rider, I find this turbulence and noise excessive. I almost hesitate to say that the OEM taller windshield reduces turbulence and noise for me; it might make things worse for another rider. There are other options available. I can't recommend a size because all are a compromise and I hardly know for sure what I like much less what someone one else will like. I do like the tall OEM windscreen. I've used a Clearview +11 with the top 4 inches cut off, thus removing the flipped-up lip, and with a 3/4 inch by 3 1/2 inch slot cut just above the fairing to lessen the low-pressure area behind the windscreen. Neither windscreen provided a pocket of still air for the rider's head but either were an acceptable compromise for me. My advice is to try before buying if you can find a friend with what you think you want. My solution on a previous KLR was to shorten the stock screen, thus removing the flipped-up lip and providing a smooth, quiet air flow but at the price of more bugs on my face shield.
Tankbags are useful and not all will fit the steeply sloped KLR tank. Wolfman makes at least three options: a big tank bag with a KLR-specific mounting harness. a "Lite" version of this bag, or my personal favorite small Wolfman, the Enduro model, which fits the KLR very well and allows refueling without moving the tankbag.
For riders who tour or camp a lot, side cases and luggage are desirable. I like side racks from Tim Bernard at Happy Trails. These can be used with a variety of side cases, including Givi. I have either a Givi tail box or Ortlieb Dry bag duffel for more gear. Happy Trail products can be purchased directly from Tim Bernard in Boise Idaho or from Fred Hink at Arrowhead Motorsports in Moab Utah.
Many KLR650 riders like K&N filters but if a rider rides dusty roads, especially with other riders, the K&N filter can easily become useless in one day of riding. For all-day dusty-road riding I prefer to use the OEM foam element and clean it after the ride. I carry a spare if I'm out more than a day. In my opinion, the best improvement one can make to the OEM filter is to treat it with a good foam-filter-specific treatment oil like Bel Ray filter oil.
Aggressive riders may benefit from a fork brace, especially on twisty pavement. I preferably the K-9 model from Happy Trails or Arrowhead Motorsports.
If you check the static sag and weigh less than 200 pounds, you will probably be surprised to learn the front springs are not too soft as so often claimed on email forums. The rear spring may be marginal. This is not guess work. Any serious sport bike rider knows the importance of setting static sag. KLR riders mostly ride on paved or good unpaved roads and can benefit from proper static sag. Example: I weigh 180 - 190 pounds. The KLR has 9 inches of suspension travel, front and rear. I first establish baseline measurements with wheels off the floor and suspension fully extended. Seeking a rule-of-thumb sag of 30% to 1/3 of travel, I measure only 2 1/2 inches of sag at the front forks with my weight on the bike. This is a little less than 28%, indicating the springs may be marginally too stiff but certainly not too soft. I could cut shorter spacers and adjust the preload but I won't; this is close enough for me. The rear springs are a bit soft for me although perhaps just right for the rider of average weight. Example: with the rear preload on the softest setting, I get 3.5 inches of sag with my weight on the bike when I'm wanting no more than 3 inches. A couple clicks of preload (with one click on the rebound damping adjuster to compensate) mostly cures this. If I consistently carried heavy loads or a passenger, I could benefit from a stiffer rear spring — but not so stiff as to upset static sag.
Few things about the KLR get more attention than mufflers, airboxes and jetting. Motorcycle owners, perhaps more than most vehicle owners, seem compelled to "improve" on what factory engineers have done. I know: it's true that mufflers and air boxes are muffled to suit noise regulations and carburetors may be lean in the interest of emissions. I also know this truth to be mine: at the altitudes I ride — 4,000 to 13,000 feet — the KLR650 comes as close to running perfectly as any carbureted motorcycle I've ridden. I've yet to ride with other KLRs, with all the trick parts and air box modifications, that performed better than my stock bike. Many performed poorly at some point in the ride. They all made more noise. Noise is commonly mistaken for power. Seat-of-the-pants is a notoriously unreliable dynamometer. Given this truth, it's easy for me to refrain from modifying muffler, airbox and jetting [unless I have a specific problem to diagnose and solve]. People near sea level may know a different truth but I've been briefly at 190 feet below sea level in Death Valley and my stock KLR ran fine.
There are very few tuners good enough to improve on what the factory engineers have done and the ones that can are busy making race bikes perform better with a much different power band than any engineer, or normal rider, would consider appropriate for street use. Unfortunately, exhaust, air box and carburetor modifications are urban legend and, like believing 21 inch front wheels on any bike, no matter how big and heavy, will make it a dirt bike (with the exception of Harley-Davidson where a 21" front wheel makes it a custom), this legend will live for years. I'm told there are Honda dirt bikes that come out of the box "corked up" and modifications to the airbox and exhaust are routine but that doesn't mean the KLR always needs modification. The KLR was engineered to be a street bike, not an off-pavement race bike.
The air/fuel mixture of an engine is science. Adding more air on a stock KLR won't help unless the engine is running rich or one makes it richer to compensate. This has limited usefulness on stock engines. You have to be able to move this increased volume of air and fuel all the way from airbox through the exhaust and do so in a manner that doesn't harm rideability. A free-flowing exhaust may cause a KLR to need more air and richer jetting but chances are the results will be marginally more power somewhere in the power band and less in others. I've yet to ride with a modified KLR that could demonstrate improved power. Popping a few parts in and making holes in the airbox because one read about it on the Internet is not the correct approach. As I said, "Seat-of-the-pants is a notoriously unreliable dynamometer." That's why I have a fixed test loop with hills and straights which I use repeatedly.
I have tested a Staintune (Australian) muffler. Impressions: beautiful finish, perfect fit — better fit than any aftermarket pipe I've seen on a KLR650. Performance: The Staintune robbed me of several mph top end on familiar roads, familiar tests, tests I've done on other KLR650s. The Staintune also made this KLR a slug in the upper mid-range and made the top-end over-rich at WOT to the point of stumbling. It did sharpen response and torque around 2000 RPM which could make it a more responsive dirt bike in the slow stuff but at the cost of a terrible racket.
To be fair, the pipe I tested had a small dent caused by the rear brake caliper when used on a KLR with 1 inch lowering links. I suppose the dent could have hurt performance. After all, the shape of the muffler interior is supposed to be "designed." Nevertheless, I don't want one. This was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to borrow a Staintune for testing. I will be forever grateful but the muffler was returned to the owner.
I put the stock pipe back on and repeated my test ride to confirm the Staintune pipe had degraded performance. It had, except at 2,000 RPM where the Staintune clearly improved response and torque. I realize one motorcycle, one experience is not a scientific test. Nevertheless, I wouldn't want a Staintune muffler. It's loud, even with the baffle in and I don't like the sound.
The front brake is adequate for my use. To be fair, though, I should mention that I live in Western Colorado and spend very little time in heavy traffic. I don't want braided stainless encased brake lines. I use the front brake on gravel and dirt and don't want to change the graduated feel.
The seat, a highly personal thing, is adequate for me. However, since I ride over 20,000 miles each year on different motorcycles, my butt is perhaps acclimated to motorcycle seats. I have ridden my KLR 1,416 miles in two days and suffered no unbearable discomfort (notice I didn't say I was never uncomfortable). On the open highway, I often ride with my feet on the passenger footpegs. This rotates my body forward, transferring more weight to my thighs.
The stock tires work well for me but wear quickly. Since I like to go fast on twisty paved roads, I prefer Metzeler Tourance tires. I don't need knobbies and never have unless I rode mud or soft, loamy soil. I ride off-pavement on moderate trails with people who swear they do need knobbies. I go where they go, even in sand. A rider who runs out of traction should first suspect his/her right wrist before blaming tires.
More on sand: a rider should not believe that a different tire tread can compensate for a lack of steering control in deep sand. The KLR is heavy; the tire stylishly tall and narrow; the front tire sinks easily in sand, reducing trail to zero or negative and the bike won't steer. This is a natural phenomenon and not a problem with the motorcycle. The traditional solution is to stand on the pegs, butt back, and keep the throttle on. Weight back and throttle on lightens the front, giving the tire a chance to stay on top. Standing on the pegs allows quick body-English, improving steering immensely. I'm not suggesting that anyone having problems with deep sand should do this. If you run out of throttle before you run out of sand, you may go over the handlebars. I don't want that to be my fault. If you are having trouble in sand, though, you might experiment — at your own risk.
I wouldn't trust the stock composite skid plate in rocks. Good after-market replacements are available for well under $100.
The stock gear-change lever breaks easily at the weld, especially if you have bent and straightened it. Stronger after market levers are available. Be careful, though. The IMS lever, if not changed since this writing, is an inch longer than stock. Unless you have big feet or are used to moving your foot to shift, you may not like it. I use one made by McDonalds and it seems about the same length as stock.
There are a few other items worth mentioning. Because I ride in the winter I like a remote sensor thermometer with the sensor just behind the lower grill on the small KLR front fairing — not too close to the headlight heat. This thermometer at $17 is a bargain as are many items in the Aerostich catalog. When it's below 40 degrees out, I often wear a Gerbing's heated light jacket/liner and heated gloves with a variable controller. The KLR can handle these items up to 1/2 power without discharging. Above 1/2 power, one needs to turn the headlight off with a switch available from Fred at Arrowhead Motorsports. I take the guesswork out of this procedure with a Charging System Indicator. Several are available. I have often used a small analog clock with a sweep second hand, also from Aerostich for only $15, another bargain. This clock clips to the handlebars. Vibration must not be a problem as I've had this clock on two KLRs, a Buell and maybe other motorcycles.
Taming the front end for aggressive riders
Years ago, when 21 inch front wheels with narrow tires became common on motocross and light-weight off-pavement motorcycles, the improvement in handling was impressive. Consequently, the idea that any "real" dirt bike must have a 21 inch front wheel became firmly entrenched in the minds of off-pavement motorcyclists and remains so even today (although 20 inch wheels are seen more and more on motocross tracks). I've long believed 21 inch front wheels and narrow tires are inappropriate on big heavy dual sports, especially when used on sand or pavement. Yet all serious duel sport motorcycles, even heavy ones like the KLR650, are sold with 21 inch front wheels. I'm certain marketing departments insist this be so. The customers expect it. If the KLR had a 19 inch front wheel, most people either wouldn't buy it or would promptly change to a 21 inch wheel and announce on email lists that a dramatic improvement was made. And they would believe this because that's the way many people are.
There are two reasons why I believe the KLR should have a 19 inch front rim and wider tire: with leading-axle forks, the KLR already has insufficient trail for serious sand riding. The narrow tire sinks easily, reducing trail even more or making it negative, and the bike can't track. Many people attempt to solve this tracking problem without understanding suspension geometry. Some people blame tires because that's easy. It's not easy to increase trail significantly even if you understand it (lowering the rear a little or extending the forks a little makes a very small difference in trail) but it is easy to increase tire width. As the tire gets wider and fatter, the wheel must be wider and also smaller in diameter to keep ride-height near what it was. The 2nd and most important reason for me to use a wider front tire is the improvement in pavement handling. I'm guessing that, in addition to the obvious benefits of having more rubber on the road, the increased mass means greater gyroscopic action, thereby improving stability as well. Additionally, braking is improved and the KLR can now benefit from serious brake upgrades such as a larger rotor and perhaps a 2-piston caliper, a desirable upgrade for people who ride in heavy, fast traffic or ride seriously fast on twisty paved roads. The down side is a modest increase in unsprung weight. This could be important in some kinds of competition, but on a KLR?
At 17,600 miles, I converted my 2002 KLR to a wider, 19 inch front rim with a wider tire [currently installed on my 2005 KLR]. I also installed a K-9 fork brace. The purpose of these modifications was to cure real and imagined problems with the light-feeling KLR front end. Stock KLRs do have a tendency to wiggle a bit at speeds over 90MPH indicated. It's not a big deal but it's noticeable. Assuming steering-head bearings are good and properly adjusted, wheel and fork alignments are correct, tires are not worn unevenly, static sag is adjusted to suit the riders weight and rear rebound damping is set appropriately, then the next logical step is to put a greater tire footprint on the road and install a fork brace to address the arguably spindly forks.
I chose an Excel rim thinking it would be at least as good as the stock KLR rims. I went conservative on rim width and tire size (1.85 and 100/90 19) because Kawasaki, for whatever reason, tends to use narrow rims on the KLR and I wanted the front to be, and look, compatible with the rear. Also I wanted it to look like a factory product. I believe it does.
My KLR was ridden aggressively with the 19 inch front wheel before installing the fork brace. Both the wider tire and fork brace made equally noticeable differences. Together, they have transformed the motorcycle — made it feel like a more expensive machine. Experimenting is expensive and I was afraid I might be wrong about the results. But I wasn't wrong. I'm very pleased with the results for the way I ride. A serious rough off-pavement rider might not like it but a KLR isn't intended for serious rough off-pavement riding anyway. Pavement riders should love it. I was already cornering fairly fast on the KLR on pavement. Even if I'm not faster now, I'll be cornering with a lot more precision and feel. Some riders believe a 21 inch front wheel gives a larger diameter making it easier to traverse uneven surfaces but my 19 inch wheel and new 100/90 tire is only 1/2 inch smaller in diameter than the previous 21" wheel and worn 90/90 tire. Ride-height has changed only 1/4 inch. I'm using Metzeler Tourance tires. The results could vary with a different tire brand. Not all tires are the same diameter for a given size.
Do I believe everyone should change to a 19 inch front wheel? Of course not. I have ridden over 30,000 mostly aggressive miles on stock KLRs and I've enjoyed every mile. But I have specific objectives that can benefit from changes that prove to be truly functional rather than just "what everyone else is doing." I offer my opinion here in the off chance someone else may be considering similar changes. It's my belief that most riders will not realize a benefit from a 19 inch front wheel, especially if better flotation in sand is the objective. The increase in width is small and the benefit will be small — small enough that most riders may find no benefit. If a rider is having trouble with sand, my suggestion would be to save your money and practice technique. That can make a big difference.
The counterbalancer chain tension lever
The counterbalancer chain tensioner lever, known on the KLR list as the "doohickey," is subject to early failure. While there may be thousands of KLRs that haven't failed, there are many that have. More alarming is the number not known to have failed until examined. There was a comprehensive article about this problem in the October, 2003 issue of Dual Sport News. The cost of early replacement is modest: maybe less than $200 if you have a shop do it; maybe a little over $100 if you do it yourself and buy all parts, tools and gaskets you need, all of which are available from Fred at Arrowhead Motorsports in Moab, UT. A comprehensive do-it-yourself article can be found on the web by Mark St.Hilaire.
November 2003, 16,500+ miles on my 2002 KLR650: Davis Service Center, Montrose, Colorado, was asked to replace the stock counterbalancer chain tensioner lever with a stainless steel upgrade from Eagle Manufacturing & Engineering. This was to be preventative maintenance. Upon internal inspection, the stock counterbalancer chain tensioner lever was found to be broken. When the case on the opposite side of the engine was removed to retrieve the broken tensioner lever pieces from where they were expected to be resting near a screen in the oil system, additional broken metal from another source was found. The outer race or bearing retainer on the transmission main shaft bearing had disintegrated. The bearings were still more-or-less in place and this problem was not yet apparent when operating the KLR. The transmission main shaft bearing failure on my KLR is apparently not a common problem. No one knows why mine failed. There is no evidence that broken pieces from the counterbalancer chain tensioner lever contributed to this problem. After examining the failed transmission bearing parts, Kawasaki USA generously paid for engine disassembly and replacement of the transmission main shaft bearing even though the motorcycle was out of warranty. Kawasaki did not acknowledge any problem with the counterbalancer adjustment parts.
Previously owned KLR650s
NO. 5 2006 KAWASAKI KLR 650
Kokopelli's Trail, above Fisher Valley in Utah
2006 KAWASAKI KLR 650: Purchased new February 27, 2006 from Davis Service Center, Montrose, CO.
Traded back to Davis Service Center on May 23, 2006 for a 2006 Suzuki DL650.
My reason for buying the 2006 KLR650 seemed valid. I've been riding 25,000 miles each year and was weary of performing routine maintenance and replacing tires. In order to simplify maintenance and reduce expenses, I decided to have only one motorcycle. I often ride alone into remote areas of the Utah desert. I wanted a motorcycle I was comfortable handling on bad roads and one I could likely pick up if I dropped it in an awkward spot. Based on prior experience, the KLR seemed the logical choice and it would have been had I not previously owned a couple DL650 Suzukis. The power, comfort and refinement of the DL650 should have compensated me for the inconvenience of avoiding a few roads too rough.
NO. 4 2003 KAWASAKI KLR 650
2003 KAWASAKI KLR 650: purchased used at 3329 miles on January 24, 2006 from a friend and riding buddy. Sold in April, 2006.
January 2006: Yet another KLR650. We have too many unpaved roads in the west to confine myself to pavement; multi-purpose motorcycles serve me well. My choices have included an R1150GS (new), a DR650 (new) two DL650 V-Stroms (new) and four KLR650s (three new, one used). Each time I've sold or traded a KLR, I've soon missed it. From Colorado's unpaved mountain passes to camping in remote areas of Utah to back-to-back 600 mile days on pavement, the comfortable, light and agile KLR serves me well.
Modifications: I didn't make many modifications to this KLR650, partly because I didn't pay much for it and consequently don't want to spend much on it. Fortunately, the KLR doesn't need much modification despite what you may have read on Internet forums. This KLR came with IMS footpegs, aftermarket shift lever and OEM tall windscreen. I kept the Pelican cases from the DL650 so all I needed was side racks, an assortment of shims (for valve adjustment checks) and a few oil filters. This I ordered from Fred Hink at
Arrowhead Motorsports in Moab Utah.
The side racks are Happy Trails' SU model. I also attached a mounting plate for a 36 liter Givi tail box which I previously used on two KLRs, two DL650s and other motorcycles. I installed heated grips and a Happy Trails K-9 fork brace. also from Arrowhead Motorsports.
February 27, 2006: Coincidently and for various reasons, I decided to simplify my motorcycle maintenance responsibilities and costs by owning only one motorcycle. This one motorcycle would ideally be a KLR650 and If a KLR650 was to be my only motorcycle I wanted to start with a new one. Over the next couple days I removed accessories from the 2003 model, except for heated grips, and re-installed the original 15 tooth counter sprocket. I left the bike on consignment at Davis Service Center in Montrose.
NO. 3 2005 KAWASAKI KLR 650
2005 KAWASAKI KLR 650: purchased new on November 2, 2004 from Davis Service Center, Montrose, CO.
April 2005: After 5000 mostly winter miles, I traded this 2005 KLR650 for a new 2005 DL650 V-Strom — not because of any disappointment in the KLR, one of my favorite motorcycle, but because two riding buddies bought DL650 V-Stroms and I knew I would be riding the KLR WOT trying to keep up. "Ride what your friends ride," I've often advised.
NO. 2 2002 KAWASAKI KLR 650
2002 KAWASAKI KLR 650 Purchased new in late August, 2002 from Davis Service Center, Montrose, CO.
Traded back to Davis Service Center in February, 2004, at 19,000 miles, for no better reason than I was 65 years old and wanted to experience a variety of motorcycles while I'm still riding — in this case a Suzuki DL650 V-Strom. This was my second KLR. I kept my service manuals, accessories and major modification components because I could reasonably expect to own a third one.
NO. 1 1999 KAWASAKI KLR 650
(Internet Photograph)
1999 KAWASAKI KLR 650: purchased new July 28,1999 from Davis Service Center, Montrose, CO.
Traded for a new 1999 Suzuki DR650 on July 18, 2000 at 9500 miles. I wanted to ride more serious trails but that ended when I discovered I had a bone density problem.
