KTM 690SM

The KTM 690SM is a supermoto-inspired multi-purpose motorcycle, a simple, fun motorcycle of moderate size and weight, a welcome break from the trend of ever bigger and heavier, ever more powerful and ever more complex super motorcycles. The 690SM is quick and fast, has excellent suspension performance, uses wheel sizes and tire choices biased towards fast pavement yet is stable and planted on unpaved roads. The 690SM is an exemplary tool for exploiting two-wheel dynamics.

I've had a lot of motorcycles and I've liked most of them. When I try listing the ones I've liked best I never know where to quit so I won't start. Aside from a few sport bikes, a more-or-less recent interest, I've preferred multipurpose motorcycles because I often ride unpaved back roads in western Colorado and eastern Utah, the longer and more remote these roads the better. Because such rides, and getting to these rides, often involve long distances I prefer mid-sized motorcycles. In the '60's and '70's, the Triumph TR6 was a favorite. In recent years I've enjoyed the Kawasaki KLR650, Suzuki DR650 and Suzuki DL650, having pretty much settled on Japanese motorcycles because of value and reliability. I've learned to live with cost-factor compromises in suspension and other components inherent in such bikes. The adventure touring-type motorcycles are almost perfect for what I do—comfortable, big tanks, luggage-capable. However, because of sport bikes I've recently owned and track schools I've attended, two conflicting capabilities have become important to me: the ability to carry serious corner speed at the apex of fast paved corners and the ability to be relaxed and confident at high speed on good dirt and gravel roads. While mid-sized adventure motorcycles satisfy my off-pavement needs, they compromise pavement corner speed due to rearward-biased weight distribution, wheel/tire size and in most examples a budget suspension (never mind the stories about dual-sports whipping sport bikes; it happens but it's the rider not the machine). Not many motorcycles can satisfy my two criteria but the new street-oriented supermoto bikes do. Given good balance, suspension and tires, nothing improves corner speed like light weight. That makes liter and bigger bikes an uninspired choice for me as they all are more than 400 pounds dry. I like 650 singles but want significantly more power than the Japanese 650 singles have. The choice, then, was obvious: KTM 690SM with the new LC4 653.7cc engine making 64HP at the crank, a weight of 335 pounds without fuel, 50/50 weight distribution, proper wheel sizes with sporty tires and high-quality, long-travel suspension. Perhaps more important, the 690SM is designed by performance-oriented engineers for serious riders in a way that built-to-a-price, mass-market bikes can never be. In the past, though, I have not found European motorcycles to have the reliability and easy maintenance of Japanese motorcycles. It was with considerable apprehension, and not a little conflict with long-held reasoning, that I decided to be less practical and try something exotic.

Dilemma The above is all true but herein lies a dilemma for me: a street supermoto is essentially a street-legal race bike. Like race-replica sport bikes, the capabilities, if exploited, are extraordinary. Such a bike deserves serious sport tires—expensive, soft tires with short life. I ride 20,000 miles or more each year. I go through tires too quickly to use the 690SM as an only motorcycle. I've tried to compromise with sport touring tires, hoping for longer life. They still wear quickly and wear patterns indicate I may be pushing them to their limits. Some might suggest slowing down but if I do that, why ride a street supermoto? More honestly, I can't ride the 690SM conservatively on sporty mountain or canyon roads; I'm addicted to speed and two-wheel dynamics. I can adapt to the limitations of a machine I'm riding. I need a second, more conservative motorcycle for rolling up miles, therefore saving the 690SM for sport rides. I can't afford a second motorcycle. I seem to have painted myself into a corner.

The break-in miles: the day after purchasing the KTM 690SM I rode it on an annual nine-unpaved-passes-in-one-day ride. This 450+ mile Rocky Mountain loop is half paved, half unpaved and varying in elevation from under 5,000 to over 12,000 feet. The route is more like a 450 mile motard track than like a typical dual sport route. The unpaved sections, although occasionally cobble-stone rough, are never technical. What better way to spend the first day on a new KTM 690SM?

I can't imagine a bike with street tires handling better on unpaved roads. With 17" wheels, both ends, and sport bike tires, nearly everyone would assume the 690SM unsuitable for fast riding on gravel and dirt roads. Wrong. I have never ridden anything that was more planted in unpaved corners than this bike. To be fair, though, we had no deep, loose gravel on this ride. This is the new-generation LC4 single-cylinder engine, recently introduced in the 2007 690 Super Moto. [Note: for 2008, KTM has introduced a 690 Duke, 690 Enduro and variations on the 690 Supermoto theme, all using the new 653.7cc LC4 engine although the Enduro and the SMC are carbureted rather than fuel injected.] The 653.7cc engine is rated at 64HP at the crank. I've read that it's the most powerful production single-cylinder engine in the world. Unhappy pulling hard much under 4000 RPM, the incredibly strong mid-range is where the action is. On this ride, I was honoring the break-in recommendations and it was still a fast ride, missing only the usual 100MPH straight stretches on the good gravel and dirt, limited instead to more like 80MPH. The gearing is tall and a 6th gear makes it seem even taller. A crank-driven balancer makes it smooth for a single. The long-travel suspension is top-quality components, both ends. Weighing only 340 lbs. wet, the handling is predictably nimble. However, it feels nothing like a sport bike but more like a DR650 Dual Sport with power and rubber—not a bad thing as I always liked riding tight, twisty paved roads on the DR650s I've owned. The four-piston Brembo front brake caliper, far more powerful than anything I've had on such a light bike, nevertheless is very easy to modulate on gravel roads. The rear brake seems over-sensitive and requires a light touch to avoid locking the rear wheel. I expected the Super Moto to excel on pavement but I never dreamed it would work as well as it does on unpaved roads. What a motorcycle!

After the break-in: the day after the nine-pass ride I rode the KTM back to the dealer in Gunnison, Colorado, for the first service. I went by way of CO92, also known locally as "Black Mesa," a favorite sport bike road. As I was past the recommended break-in period, I decided to make tentative excursions into the upper part of the power band. Based on speedometer reading it seemed to perform with something less than the upper-end vigor I had expected. Also, riding at a fast pace that was comfortable for me, I wasn't carrying more indicated corner speed than I would have on a DL650 V-Strom. This too surprised me. Suspicious, I used the second-hand on my wrist watch to time the KTM past a few mile posts on my return home. The speedometer seemed to be spot on at 60MPH which means 5 to 7 MPH slower than most motorcycles I've owned recently. This may sound insignificant but I suggest it isn't. On familiar roads, most riders, certainly me anyway, have a known comfortable speed for a given corner. Since lean angle can vary considerably from one kind of motorcycle to another, a quick glance at the speedometer is really the only visual clue we have for the speed we are going although riders who always know what gear they are in may be more attuned to the tachometer than the speedometer. If we apex a familiar tight corner at an indicated 60MPH on a motorcycle with a common 5 to 7 MPH error, then we are really going only 53 to 55 MPH. The same corner at 60MPH on a motorcycle with an accurate speedometer would be around a 10% increase in corner speed and I say that is very significant. Top-end too will seem disappointing on a motorcycle with an accurate speedometer.

Repeated milepost timings indicated the speedometer was accurate and a Garmin GPS unit confirmed it. The performance improved with use. With more than 2,000 miles on the odometer, I was able to often exceed 100MPH on the GPS in a favorite canyon. My top speed on 2 or 3 occasions wavered between 107 and 108MPH on the GPS. By comparison, that would have been about 117MPH on a previously-owned DR650 speedometer, had the DR been capable of such speeds, about 115MPH indicated on a KLR650 had it been capable and maybe 113 to 115MPH indicated on a DL650 which was capable of such speeds. The 690SM is fast enough, about as fast as the 2007 DL650 I owned although not as quick perhaps. Not impressively fast but fast enough and it does have a wicked mid-range.

After 8000 miles: I've become very found of this motorcycle. My perception of how a big-single motorcycle should perform has probably been changed forever. The 690SM has exceeded my expectations—a true dual sport for me, my two sports being fast paved roads and fast gravel and dirt. I may well be carrying higher apex speed on pavement than I have on anything I've owned before and I'm thrilled but confident at high speed on good dirt and gravel. Maybe it's because the trellis frame doesn't flex. Perhaps it's the suspension that works so well I never think about it—except when it smooths bumpy pavement in a fast sweeper or keeps the tires in contact with the ground on a rocky, unpaved mountain pass. It's also the power and partly the sound, the visceral thrill of the big-single engine. It's all these things and more. I enjoy riding the 690SM. I enjoy owning the 690SM. I like it enough to adapt to the motorcycle: I have no room for a tank bag so I use a seat bag; I have no plans to add side cases or racks; I'll plan my rides around the limited fuel tank capacity (reserve usually at 130 to 160 miles depending on speed); the seat is not very comfortable but I've spent a 10-hour day on it with few breaks and don't plan to change it.

So far there have been no reliability issues, no warranty work. I've never had to add oil between changes. The valve clearances needed no adjustment at 6000 miles. With a couple exceptions, most parts I've needed are available online at reasonable prices from reputable dealers who also have the fiche online (I've been pleased with Elite Motorsports in Loveland, CO). Oil filters (2 required each change) were readily available as were the O-rings and crush washers I wanted. I ordered two replacement air filters and received only one. I have not been able to find the factory recommended oil (Motorex Cross Power 4T 10W/60—I'm using Motorex Cross Power 4T 10W/50). NOTE: on 11/23/07, I received a spark plug and factory service manual (on CD) ordered 10/26/07 from Elite Motorsports. They once told me they could get the correct oil for me. When I use what I have I'll let them try—maybe the KTM distributor stocks it even though the Motorex distributor doesn't. On11/26/07, I received a 2nd spark plug ordered from Munn Racing on 11/16/07. I'm guessing the KTM parts warehouse didn't have the spark plugs in stock initially.

"You really use this many tires?" asked a FedEx driver delivering a 4th set of tires in as many months. It's not the motorcycle's fault. The front tire doesn't cup and I have no complaints other than how quickly the rear tire wears (ample evidence suggests a gentle throttle hand could double rear tire life but so would a less aggressive motorcycle). The tires would wear even faster except I'm compromising with sport touring tires albeit tires biased more towards cornering than long wear. I've had good luck with Avon AV55/56 Storm ST tires. I am about to try Bridgestone BT021s hoping the dual-compound rear will work well on cold winter pavement. If a planned track day in Nevada next March happens, I may mount Dunlop Qualifiers. There are other tires I would try but the cost is too high and the tread-life too short for my budget.

Problems and rumors: Spend much time on Internet forums and one soon hears of problems with the 690SM. I've heard recurring stories of leaking head gaskets, oil leaks, overheating and coolant loss. In addition to these mechanical problems others have complained of high-speed wobbles. I'm sure at least some of the mechanical problems have been real and for those owners I sympathize. However, the forums reflect a world market. I suggest the percentage of mechanical problems have been small. Consider forums for other brands, BMW for example. Peruse the forums searching for information indicating that BMW motorcycles are plagued with problems and reliability issues and you will find it. Look for testimonial support for believing BMW motorcycles are the best in the world and you will find that too. So what will you have learned: only that people are unreliable. As for head shake on the 690SM: I'm a skeptic. I find it illogical to believe that engineers who are currently building some of the finest competition motorcycles in the world would build a bike that inherently shakes at high speed. There are many reasons for head shake but most of the mechanical reasons come from wear or use, including the uneven wear and cupping of front tires. What many people may not know or believe, is that perhaps the most common cause of head shaking or wobbling is riders themselves due to tension, gripping the bars, cold weather, posture, attitude and sometimes because they have messed with the suspension geometry without really understanding what they were doing. What I do know is this: I've owned 42 motorcycles, including a few of the most respected sporty bikes in the world and I find the 690SM to be as stable and predictable as anything I've owned. It is quick-steering and nimble but that's a design objective, not a flaw. Such a bike does make it even more important that the rider be relaxed and experienced. As for mechanical problems, perhaps I'm lucky but my 690SM has needed no repairs, leaked no oil or coolant and I haven't had to add oil between changes.

A word on overheating: I've heard about the temperature display going to 2 bars below the top when it should remain in the middle. I can't find where the owner's manual states it should remain in the middle but perhaps I missed it. It does say the radiator fan switches on when the coolant temperature reaches 216 degrees Fahrenheit, and the temperature indicator will begin to blink and the red cooling liquid temperature warning lamp will light up when the temperature reaches 239 degrees Fahrenheit. I have ridden my 690SM in sand, steep slow climbs and 100 degree air temperature. On normal roads at speed, the temperature display on my 690SM stays about the middle. When I leave the pavement for sand, or steep, slow climbs at 90+ degree temperatures, the display quickly goes to two, maybe one bar from the top. At this pont the fan comes on and the display goes no higher. The fan is not noisy and may not be heard above the engine and other noises. My fan never stays on for long; it goes off when the key is turned off. I don't ride in heavy city traffic but I suspect doing so would produce similar results. I've never seen the display flash, nor have I seen a warning light. I've never lost any coolant.

Information sources: There is serious pecking-order among information sources. My rule of thumb is simple and based upon the belief that engineers who designed and built the motorcycle know more than anyone else. Therefore, I rank the value of information sources as follows:
   .: Owner manuals and factory service manuals.
   .: Service department of dealer with well-established reputation for knowledge and honesty.
   .: A friend or acquaintance if you know for certain this person has relevant knowledge.
Conspicuously absent from my list of reliable information resources are magazines and Internet forums.

I read the magazines, always remembering that even the better writers have personal prejudices, may be biased towards favorite brands, wrong about details, prone to perpetuating myths and after all are writing for an editor who in turn is wanting to keep his job by pleasing the largest possible number of readers as well as advertisers. One of the more honest magazines, Motorcycle Consumer News, promises to be free of advertising and therefore free of advertising-influenced bias. This seems to be true enough but they do come across as a low-budget operation with rather inadequate technical editing. When Motorcycle Consumer News tests a motorcycle or product I know well, I do find mistakes.

I sometimes fine useful information on the Internet but the forums are swarming with faux-experts who talk more than they ride. There's no shortage of opinion. Search the forums for information on the 690SM and you will find boldly stated facts: the 690SM is ugly; the 690SM is beautiful; the springs are too soft; the springs are too hard; the power is awesome; it's a bit corked-up and needs modding; the suspension is excellent; the forks need revalving.... It doesn't end there but the point is, none of this information is useful. From the two extremes you have people who really and rightfully like their new motorcycle but may not be articulate enough to describe it adequately, and people who believe posting jargon-laced, soi-disant descriptions of the motorcycle's short-comings and must-do modifications will cause the poster to be perceived as expert. The faux-expert fantasy: "I'm so fast this motorcycle, good as it may be, isn't good enough for me; I'm so knowledgeable I can improve on what the engineers have done." Learn to discriminate between knowledge and excreta-tauri.

2007 KTM 690SM Owner's Log (Most recent entry at top):

March 17, 2008: 316+8638=8954 miles. Changed oil and filters. Used Motorex Cross Power 4T 10W50, a fully synthetic oil.

March 16, 2008: 316+8638=8954 miles. A snow storm held off until evening so I rode the 690SM to Gateway for lunch. Met Mike and Ken. Rode Dolores Canyon both ways. The KTM and Bridgestone BT21 tires performed flawlessly. I rode relaxed, comfortable and fast. It was a very good last canyon ride on the 690SM. It may not have been the quickest trip I've ever made through that canyon but it's likely I'll never go that fast again. I'm changing the oil and filters and putting the 690SM on consignment at Davis Service Center in Montrose, Colorado. Of the many bikes I've owned, the KTM 690SM, like the Triumph TR6, Zundapp ISDT Replica, Honda VFR800 and Honda 599, are all motorcycles good enough to have made me a better rider. The KTM 690SM is a great motorcycle, perhaps my favorite performance motorcycle of all I've owned but I'm 69 years old, my available funds are depleted and I owe my wife for the KLR650 I've been riding since January 8. I can't keep both bikes. The KTM is the most fun for a spirited ride; The KLR650 is the most useful and comfortable for almost any ride. I hate to see the KTM go but the KLR makes more sense for an old man. The last 690SM ride will be 40 miles to the dealer. There won't be any more fast motorcycles for me.

March 15, 2008: 80+8638=8718 miles. First ride since hitting deer. This wouldn't have taken so long but my favorite motorcycle dealership, Davis Service Center of Montrose, CO, was on the verge of getting a KTM dealership and I chose to wait until they could order my parts. All items were correct except for tank graphics. Those have been reordered and are due next week. No hurry. I want to make one more fast ride in a favorite canyon before I put the KTM on consignment.

January 02, 2008: 8638 miles. Down for repairs after hitting a deer and aborting Monument Valley trip. This mileage here is accurate; I had the mileage from the previous log entry and knew the mileage from home to the accident location. I never saw the instrument cluster again and when repaired I'll be starting from zero

December 20, 2007: 8471 miles. All checked out and ready for a January trip to Monument Valley.

December 5, 2007: 8327 miles. Mounted and balanced new Bridgestone BT21 tires. The Avon Storms still had a little tread but they were getting squirrely, especially the front. No wonder. The front tire was significantly triangulated. There were wide flat spots on either side of center and the tread on these flat spots was nearly worn away while there was still pretty good tread in the center. These flat areas were roughed up, too. From what? Side forces or trail braking? Either one or both, I'm concerned I may be approaching the tires limits. The rear tire was worn in the center. A combination of big single, serious power, light weight and routinely hard acceleration makes for short center tread life.

November 27, 2007: 8237 miles. Lunch at 141 Diner today, 30% chance of snow forecast for tonight and tomorrow. Time to mount and balance two new tires and replace the original spark plug which can become the spare I've not had.

November 18, 2007: 8014 miles. Lunch at 141 Diner, favorite fast canyon paved road from Gateway to Nucla, unpaved road over Uncompahgre to Delta and home. Nice sunny Sunday afternoon ride over the Uncompahgre and almost no traffic.

November 14, 2007: 7800 miles. Lunch at 141 Diner, favorite fast canyon paved road from Gateway to Naturita, unpaved road up Uncompahgre, 2/3 way up turned onto 12 mile one-lane dirt road south to Divide Road then 90 Road to Montrose. Beautiful scenery and fun roads with very little traffic made even better on this day by little haze, especially blue skies and a few fluffy white clouds.

November 2-3, 2007: 7150 miles. Great Utah trip with four riders from Ulysses KS.

October 28, 2007: 6364 miles. Lunch at 141 Diner. Nice canyon ride. Saw 1 sport bike, 1 sport touring bike, a couple metric cruisers, about 35 Harleys and not one BMW. Not unusual except there is usually a BMW or two. And this on one of the best sport bike roads around. Of course there were uncountable ATV's in the backs of pickups.

October 26, 2007: 6175 miles. Rode Black Mesa. Bike works fine. All is well. Back home, I decided to comply with the owner's manual recommendation and change the original air-filter element as part of the 6000 mile service. The OEM element is the type I prefer, a large element of fuzzy-paper material with a huge amount of surface area considering the high number of unusually deep pleats. It didn't look dirty but I've been on a lot of long, dusty roads and at $10.50 the OEM replacement is inexpensive compared to some I've bought.

October 23, 2007: 6015 miles. Lunch at Gateway. Had a nice visit with Mike. Later: 6000 mile service. Fresh oil and filters, checked valve adjustment (all within specs) and other checks and adjustments with one surprise: the engine now pulls much stronger from a lower RPM. I've always said the 690 won't pull hard from below 4000RPM. Now it pulls hard from 3000RPM. The only thing I did that may be responsible is remove more of the evaporative emissions equipment (required only in California). At 1749 miles I removed the canister from under and behind the seat to free up space for tools. I plugged the vacuum line and left the tank vent open. Now, since I had the fuel tank off for a valve clearance check, I removed an electrically operated valve unit from above the engine, secured the wires I unplugged, removed the entire vacuum hose from the device to the rear and plugged the vacuum hose from the intake. Nothing really different from before except the device itself is gone. A test ride, mostly to see if I put everything back together after the valve clearance check, revealed much improved low end capabilities. Also, the FI light (an all-purpose trouble indicator light) stayed on. I've since reinstalled the valve unit with no hoses attached but the wires plugged in. The FI light is off and the improvement is unchanged. I don't know why it's improved. I don't know enough about what the electrically operated valve unit did to understand why the low-end is better without it, if indeed that's the reason. I'm suspecting an over-lean condition caused by the valve unit but if so it was there from the beginning.

October 21, 2007: 5836 miles. I weighed my 690SM: 340 pounds. That's what it weighs ready to ride with about 1 gallon of fuel and the light-weight handlebar fairing (for winter) but no tail bag and heavy extra tools removed. Very good and better yet, that's 170 pounds on the front and 170 pounds on the rear. I became curious when I realized KTM claims 335 pounds without fuel which implies something different from the common and equivocal "dry weight" used by many manufacturers.

October 7, 2007: 5524 miles. Since the battery is under the fuel tank, I had intended to install my Gerbing's wiring harness when I did the 6000 mile service. However, it was 30 degrees this morning and I decided a winter test ride was in order. As it turned out, it was easy to remove the seat with the ignition key, remove one bolt in the tank and slide the tank up and back without removing or disconnecting anything else. This made both battery terminals easily accessible without moving the battery. It was low forties when I left for a 177 mile test ride, some colder on a low pass just over 7,000 feet elevation. The Gerbings heated jacket liner and heated gloves worked fine. On the way home from lunch at the 141 Diner in Gateway, I had a few miles of light rain and spitting snow. I left the Gerbing's gear on about 2/3 power for 90 miles from Gateway to my garage, even through Delta at slow speeds, to see if the charging system could keep up. It did. I put the battery tender on it at home and the green light flashed for less than 1 minute before showing solid green, indicating full charge.

October 3, 2007: 5347 miles. Winterizing the 690SM, for me, means installing a temporary windscreen and wiring for heated jacket liner and heated gloves.

September 27, 2007: 5268 miles. Unaweep Canyon both ways with lunch at 141 Diner, backroads through orchards and vineyards to Palisade, short trip on Interstate 70 to CO65, then up Plateau Canyon and over Grand Mesa where the aspens were beginning to turn and there was some snow up high although the road was dry. Such roads: 216 miles, 150 of which were twisty pavement varying from canyon roads under 5,000 feet elevation to mountain roads over 10,000 feet elevation.

September 25, 2007: 5050 miles. Mounted, balanced and installed a new rear Avon AV56 Storm ST tire, replacing an AV56 that was worn to the wear indicators after 3300 miles, twice the useful mileage of the Bridgestone BT090 OEM tires. The front AV55 may last until the 2nd rear is worn.

September 18, 2007: 4900 miles. Rode Unaweep and Dolores canyons again, then unpaved CO90 over the Uncompahgre Plateau to Montrose. Beautiful day. Was planning to do an overnight trip to northern New Mexico in September but now my rear tire may not be good for more than 200-300 miles. This bike is 2 months old today and the 2nd rear tire is about shot with 3151 miles on it. May go to 3500, twice the distance of the OEM rear tire but still not good. Not the tires, fault though. I brake and accelerate too hard but isn't that what this bike is for?

September 15, 2007: 4659 miles. Unusual day ride. Huge number of motorcycles on the roads. A Chance Encounter led to a memorable unplanned ride.

September 14, 2007: 4321 miles. Over Grand Mesa, lunch in Plateau City, back over Buzzard-Muddy Divide, elevation 9031 feet.

September 8, 2007: 4168 miles. Yesterday Gateway, Black Mesa today. Despite a lot of fast canyon riding the Avon Storms are getting flat in center, 1/2 worn or more at 2419 miles. Not bad mileage for me. No handling problems. Still would prefer dual-compound Bridgestone BT56 tires I had on Honda 599 but not available in correct size for KTM 690SM without buying OEM spec tires for two different Manufacturers which might upset current neutral steering/slip rates in highspeed sweepers. May try a different brand dual-compound tire or stick with Storms.

Note: recent advertising and moto-journalists themselves might cause one to believe that dual-compound tires have only recently become available to the public. I've even read that Michilin introduced the consumer dual-compound tire with the PILOT POWER 2CT. Not true. Bridgestone has had dual-compound performance tires for several years, the BT56 being a good example. Listed in the Bridgestone catalog as an "Ultra High Performance Sport" tire, the BT56 has been Original Equipment on several motorcycles including but not limited to BMW R1150R '01-04, DUCATI MONSTER 695 '07, HONDA CBR600F3 '97-99, HONDA CB900F 919 '99-06 and SUZUKI GSXR1300R '99-06 (otherwise known as the Hayabusa).

September 4, 2007: 3841 miles. Moab for lunch, back over Grand Mesa.

August 29, 2007: 3499 miles. Lunch at 141 Diner in Gateway, then a fast ride on 50 miles of favorite paved canyon and a fast ride on 50 miles of mostly unpaved road from near Nucla over the Uncompahgre Plateau to Montrose. The 690SM excelled in both environments. Great motorcycle! Had to slow for a bear crossing the paved road, a first for me in more than 250,000 miles of riding.

August 23, 2007: 2950 miles. Changed oil, 2 oil filters, cleaned 2 screens. Used Motorex Cross Power 4T 10W-50 full synthetic because 10W-60 not available locally.

August 21, 2007: 2869 miles. After topping off the fuel tank in Gateway, returned home by way of unpaved roads: Ride report.

August 16, 2007: 2666 miles. After lunch in Gateway, had a nice ride up Lands End Road to top of Grand Mesa then CO65 down from the Mesa. No Traffic on Lands End Road. KTM 690SM continues to remind me of DR650 on unpaved roads. Very stable. I once thought a KLR650 or DR650 with 10HP more would be enough. Now I know I was wrong. 20HP more is about right.

August 10, 2007: 2104 miles. Checked the static sag. It worked too well for me to suspect adjustment was needed but I check anyway. Imagine my surprise when I found no external adjustment on front preload -- or did I miss something. Anyway, the sag with my weight on the bike was within my target 25 to 30 percent of travel so no adjustment was needed. I confirmed that rebound damping adjusters were set at the 15 clicks recommended by the factory. All is good.

August 8, 2007: 2027 miles. 2027 miles. Montrose, Ridgway, Norwood, Nucla, Gateway, Whitewater and home. 270 miles of pavement, 120 miles of twisty canyon. A tire test, especially in the 50 mile canyon section along the San Miguel and Dolores rivers between Nucla and an Atomic Chicken Sandwich at 141 Diner in Gateway. This bike is wicked fast in this canyon. Corner speeds seem much slower than the speedometer indicates which is why I had a GPS unit along. The GPS unit confirmed that corner speeds were indeed high, at least for me. For someone sensitive to differences in how tires feel or perform, the Avon AV55/56 Storm ST tires work noticeably different form the Bridgestone BT090 OEM tires and perhaps they should as the BT090's are billed as supermoto tires with stiff sidewalls to facilitate backing-it-in pavement sliding. The Avon Storms are billed as latest-and-greatest Sport Touring technology and may or may not be dual compound depending on how one interprets the hype. Whatever they are they work for me. The steering is noticeably heavier and this is not bad as it was borderline sensitive on the OEM tires. The Avons track very well in fast sweepers, changing the character of the 690SM somewhat from a quick-handling dirtbike with big rubber to a lightweight upright sport bike. This suits my needs very well. Those who actually ride the 690SM like a supermoto might prefer the OEM tires but anyone, like myself, who rides it like a sport bike will almost certainly prefer the Avon Storms. Now, let's hope they wear well. FWIW: nursing a dangerously worn tire, I got 66MPG; in the fast canyon mentioned above I got 39.2MPG.

August 7, 2007: 1749 miles. Mounted, balanced and installed two new Avon AV55/56 Storm ST tires. Odd choice? Not really. I had ridden on these tires and liked them a lot. When I was checking to see if Avon made the correct size for the KTM 690SM, I discovered not only that they did but Storms are one of four tires recommended for the 690SM in Avon's fitment guide. Ran out of time. Will adjust the chain for the first time tomorrow, tighten the rear axle, check all fittings and take a ride.

August 6, 2007: 1749 miles. 1749 miles. Removed evaporative canister, a device required only in California. Large manufacturers who sell in the U.S. often build "49-state" models which do not have evaporative canisters. Smaller manufacturers such as KTM build one model for all 50 states. The device should not hurt performance but in the case of the 690SM it takes up about 75% of the tool space under the seat. I needed the space.

August 5, 2007: 1749 miles. 1749 miles. Back from what was intended to be a repeat of the June 30—July 1 Los Pinos Pass Motorcycle Camping Trip since several intended participants missed that trip. This time Mike had to work but Ken, Jeff and Verle were able to go despite several days of rain in the area and more in the forecast. A National Weather Service/NOAA Hazardous Weather Warning predicted heavy rains and flash floods in the area due to the ground already being water logged. It seemed unlikely the unpaved roads would be passable. We decided to go but to avoid unpaved roads. There was another hitch: I had misjudged my rear tire wear. I was at or near the wear bars on the rear at 1400 miles. I thought it would surely be good for another 400 miles or so. We rode Black Mesa, had lunch in Lake City, CO then rode to Sargents, CO. My OEM rear tire was chewed up in the center. I assumed it was close to the cords. My initial thought was it wouldn't make it home. The next morning I rode home by the shortest route, easy on acceleration, avoiding the rear brake, limiting my top speed to 60MPH. Ken and Jeff rode with me. I made it home at 1749 miles on a dangerously worn rear tire. The Bridgestone web site claims several virtues for this new BT090 SuperMoto tire but long wear isn't one of them. Wrong tire for my usage.

August 2, 2007: oil recommendation. The specifications from the KTM web site say: "Engine lubrication Motorex Power Synt 4T 10W50." The owner's manual says:
So what do I use? I can't find Cross Power 4T 10W/60 in the U.S. but I did read this oil was developed specifically for the new-generation LC4 engine. Until I learn otherwise from a credible source, or until Cross Power 4T 10W/60 becomes available, I'll use fully synthetic Cross Power 4T 10W/50.

July 31, 2007: 1297 miles. Found right fuel petcock leaking. Tightening it made it worse. Drained tank, removed petcock, discovered broken O-ring. I had O-rings—one slightly too large, another slightly too small. Reasoned the small one would squeeze into it's groove if tightened evenly. Apparently it did as there is no more leak. Added assortment of O-rings to my odds-and-ends repair pouch.

July 26, 2007: 1215 miles. Gateway is nearly a hundred miles from home, 50 miles from the next nearest gasoline station. I checked the mileage and saw I had enough to get there. Got there and the pumps were all out of order. Mike was there and we had a nice visit while I had my favorite Atomic Chicken Sandwich at the 141 Diner, then we enjoyed coffee and conversation at the Outpost. The repairman showed up about 2:30 P.M. and quickly fixed the computer that controls the pumps and I was able to refuel. Mike and I had a good ride home with one refreshing rain shower in Unaweep Canyon.

July 22, 2007: 957 miles. Lunch at 141 Diner. It was good to ride familiar roads. Now I know the KTM works very well in the corners.

July 20, 2007: 769 miles. Back from first service at Sun Sports Unlimited in Gunnison. The service cost $184.96. I was charged $59.95 for an unspecified quantity (price would indicate a 4-liter container) of Motorex Power Sync 4T 10W50 oil (fully synthetic) when the oil capacity is 2 liters and the only oil recommended by KTM is Motorex Cross Power 4T 10W60, a fully synthetic oil developed specifically for the new-generation LC4 engine. The owner's manual claims the warranty will be invalidated if I change my own oil. In addition to the oil and filter change, the owner's manual describes a few other first-service checks, the most significant being nuts and bolts. Once home, I checked myself and found a couple loose nuts and bolts. They made a warranty repair on a turn signal that wasn't working due to faulty wiring, something that was missed in the new-bike setup I paid $297 for.

July 19, 2007: 554 miles. Back from annual 9-unpaved-mountain-passes ride.

July 18, 2007: purchased new.

Accessories

Several KTM 690SM factory accessories, long available in Europe, are now available in the U.S. at dealers such as Elite Motorsports. Click on KTM Factory Parts (left), 2008 KTM Power Parts (right), CATEGORY: 690 SUPERMOTO (in table).

This is a minimalist motorcycle and I hope to keep it that way. However, those of us who have used tank bags for years need someplace to carry a few things. Not much space for a tank bag here. However, for someone like my self who never carries a passenger, the rear portion of the seat can certainly be utilized. What better place for a tank-bag sized container. There are any number tail bags of all sizes available and some are intended to rest at least partially or optionally on the seat. Most, though, are designed to be attached to some part of the bike. Not only does this cause one to string bungee cords or straps in unsightly places but any cord or strap touching paint or plastic is likely to mar the surface in short order. Hard cases that require a rack or mounting platform hang way too far back. I don't like the look and certainly don't want weight behind the axle on a motorcycle I've chosen for good weight distribution. I found the solution. The RKA 20 Liter STARR II Rearseatbag attaches to a pad which is strapped to the seat. No removing a tail bag to get under the seat, it all comes off. This bag looks like it was made for a KTM 690SM. I'll bet it fits better and looks better than the branded bag KTM sells. Some would be put off by the size of the 20 liter bag (more like 10 liters if the top compartment is not expanded) and I admit I believe the 8 liter bag (same footprint but much less tall) would look a lot better but I bought this bag for storage, not to make my bike look good. It's nice to know I've got expandable space for stuffing a jacket liner I might want to shed. I can't imagine a more functional solution to my storage needs.

Pictures make the bag look bigger than it is.

For winter riding, I found a relatively inexpensive fairing that I think looks very good on the 690SM. It's described here.