🚀 go-pugleaf

REInvestments wrote:
> 
> Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?   What is the performance, range, handling,
> comfort, and reliability like?

This is a purely hypothetical inquiry, right, Larry?

Tim ;-)

"Tim Morrow" <tomorrow@erols.com> wrote in message
news:3FED0BDE.A7B9D1B4@erols.com...
> REInvestments wrote:
> >
> > Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?   What is the performance, range,
handling,
> > comfort, and reliability like?
>
> This is a purely hypothetical inquiry, right, Larry?
>
> Tim ;-)

Absolutely.  As you know, I've given up motorcycles.  I even gave my GSXR
1000 K3 buyer my leathers and old helmet.  I'm down to my SIDI armour,
Triumph boots, and a few pairs of gloves, and a Widder heated vest.  If I
buy another bike, I'll have to move to a state that doesn't require helmets.

But still.... I'd like to know.

REInvestments wrote:
> 
> "Tim Morrow" <tomorrow@erols.com> wrote in message
> news:3FED0BDE.A7B9D1B4@erols.com...
> > REInvestments wrote:
> > >
> > > Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?   What is the performance, range,
> handling,
> > > comfort, and reliability like?
> >
> > This is a purely hypothetical inquiry, right, Larry?
> >
> > Tim ;-)
> 
> Absolutely.  As you know, I've given up motorcycles.  I even gave my GSXR
> 1000 K3 buyer my leathers and old helmet.  I'm down to my SIDI armour,
> Triumph boots, and a few pairs of gloves, and a Widder heated vest. 

You could use all of those items if you fly an ultralight!

(If you visit the D.C. area, you can borrow one of my bikes and wear one of my
helmets.)

I went over the bike numerous times. It is classic KTM. The detailing and
components are impeccable. They also have a history of standing behind their
product. I have ridden many in the dirt and I have never seen a mechanical
failure. Go look at one and you will be impressed. They have been working on
this twin for years so I doubt it is a thrown over the fence design. I would
buy one but I am interested in their Supermotard.

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote

> Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?

Had a 640 for a few years.

> What is the performance,

Good.  Very good.

> range,

With 7 1/2 gallons aboard, about 300 miles.

>  handling,

Amazing on dirt, very good on pavement.

> comfort,

So-so. Narrrow, hard seat and it vibrates a lot at speed.

>  and reliability


Rock solid, but expensive upkeep. Ever meet a 48 dollar oil filter?

P.
>
>

REInvestments wrote in message ...
>Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?   What is the performance, range, handling,
>comfort, and reliability like?

I haven't ridden one, so this is a mish-mash of unfounded speculation and
rehashed rumors.

Performance is supposed to be good, but no head-to-head comparos yet AFAIK.
A little lighter than the Tiger, a little more torque, don't know about the
horsepower.  Brakes are a little smaller than the Tiger, so I would imagine
it will give up something there on the street.  Ground clearance is best in
class.  Wheelbase is (I think) the longest of the adventure tourers, so
tight handling may be compromised by comparison to the rest of the class.  I
think the 21" front tire is narrower than the 19-inchers on the competing
adventure tourers, which also may play into street handling.  The only test
ride I've seen was in a dirt bike magazine who took it on a ride on power
line roads.  I think this is its element.  Probably not a threat to your
Gixxer 1K on the track.  Probably middle of the pack in street handling
among the adventure tourers - that 21" front is going to take a little more
corner setup, I think.  Probably hands-down the winner off pavement.

Range, I'm guessing, will be just under 200 miles per tank on the street.

Comfort - I've heard the seat is awful from people who have ridden it.  And
this is a big problem...with a 36" seat height, you won't be adding much in
the way of aftermarket padding.  With a 21" front wheel, you won't be doing
much to lower it, either.  [REInv et cetera probably remembers the trick of
dropping the Tiger forks an inch to get a lower seat height...isn't going to
make much of a dent here, I suspect.  It doesn't look like there's an
eccentric chain adjuster to flip, either.]  A Corbin will be wider, which
increases the inseam needed to handle it.  I can hardly imagine mounting
this thing anyway without stairs on the side; flat-footing it sounds like a
job for Andre the Giant.

Pshaw, one may say, real men are used to handling seat heights of that
size...stop with your limp-wristed, lily-livered, quiche-eating pantywaist
whining!  But the reality is that all the adventure tourer makers have made
moves to make lower seat heights possible over the last five years (BMW and
Triumph, anyway), and it's one of the typical sales objections.  And KTM has
chosen a design which is great for winning the Paris-Dakar, but maybe not in
the Streets Of San Mateo [TM].

Reliability - who knows?  KTM's not bad from what I know, but this is a new
model.

But...will this bike be homologated for sale in California?  Does it have a
catalytic converter?

It will be interesting to see how this fares.  I'm guessing the target
market is current KTM riders, and perhaps other aging formerly hard-core
dirt riders who want something other than an Old Bold Mold Wing but who
don't want a KLR650...I don't see this demographic, but what do I know?  The
pale stale males (myself included) who buy adventure tourers probably don't
want something this hard-edged.  The supermotard sounds interesting.  At the
same time, Triumph may be producing their own motarded Tiger, and there are
rumors (OK, one rumor) of a lightened R1150GS later this year.  But, if I
could predict the future, I'd go to the track and make some real money...is
Bay Meadows running?

Hank Murphy
1999 Triumph Tiger "Full Moon"
DoD#Ultra5

"Brian Wax" <waxxer@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:Su8Hb.7828$lo3.6780@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I went over the bike numerous times. It is classic KTM. The detailing and
> components are impeccable. They also have a history of standing behind
their
> product. I have ridden many in the dirt and I have never seen a mechanical
> failure. Go look at one and you will be impressed. They have been working
on
> this twin for years so I doubt it is a thrown over the fence design. I
would
> buy one but I am interested in their Supermotard.

True enough for the EXC/SX and stroker engines, but the LC4 engines have a
bit of a reputation for going pop. I had a 660 SMC which cracked a head
(between the exhaust port and the waterway) and know of at least 3 othewr
that have done this as well as quite a few main bearing failures.  The
standard LC4 (640) also has a similar reputation, but this is more own the
the user oil changes being done incorrectly.

That said I love KTM's and now have a 525EXC which is currently in dirt
trim, but I have all the bits (full akropovic Ti System, Talon/Excel wheels,
Beringer M/C Brembo Goldline brakes) to convert to Supermoto in spring.
The EXC/SX is a far better supermoto as its lighter and tuneable up to 660
power.

Given the above, I'd wait and see how two lc4 engines glued together hold
out.   Personally I'd love an Adventurer and Brackens in the UK even do a
Motarded version of one - great fun - if a bit heavy.

-- 

Grant

Some interesting points/thoughts. I have seen several around the bay area
now. I have not corralled an owner yet to get a sense of he felt about the
bike. You may be right about being the transition path for battered and worn
out dirt riders (me included). This could be why the bike appeals to me more
than any other adventurer. I see authentic dirt breeding verses the pseudo
stuff. I have ridden 21" wheels on the street and never had any handling
trouble. Then again, if I compare this feature to my Aprilia, it is truly a
false comparison.

It my be hard for a serious road pilot to make the leap to the adventurer
bike with 100% dirt heritage.

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote
>
 > Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?
>

Try www.ktmtalk.com - there are enough owners there that will give you some
info.

I do not have experience with this specific model, but if it is as nice as
my old Duke - they are a real treat.

Ron.
--
'96 KTM Duke

Hi, Hank:

Embedded comments below:

>
> I haven't ridden one, so this is a mish-mash of unfounded speculation and
> rehashed rumors.

Understood.   I still haven't run into anyone who has ridden one, despite
the magazines saying that they've been available since last May.


> A little lighter than the Tiger, a little more torque, don't know about
the
> horsepower.  Brakes are a little smaller than the Tiger, so I would
imagine
> it will give up something there on the street.

This I don't like.  My 95 Tiger didn't have very good brakes, and after the
race replica experience of the past several years, I've grown accustomed to
excellent brakes.

.  Probably not a threat to your
> Gixxer 1K on the track.

I think the R-1, two 929s, and the GSXR 1000 K3  have convinced me that
neither my skills, nor my interests are on the track, or even on
particularly fast street riding.   On the GSXR, at 53, I was embarrassed to
pull into the bar on Mines Road about a mile behind Andy on his ST1100.
I've concluded that there is only a certain amount of "fast" that I'm
capable of with the safety margin I want.   And that's slower than I used to
be.   My "need for speed" is satisfied at lower speeds than it used to be.

> Range, I'm guessing, will be just under 200 miles per tank on the street.

That's "o.k."  but not great for a twin.
>
> Comfort - I've heard the seat is awful from people who have ridden it.
And
> this is a big problem...with a 36" seat height, you won't be adding much
in
> the way of aftermarket padding.  With a 21" front wheel, you won't be
doing
> much to lower it, either.  [REInv et cetera probably remembers the trick
of
> dropping the Tiger forks an inch to get a lower seat height...isn't going
to
> make much of a dent here, I suspect.  It doesn't look like there's an
> eccentric chain adjuster to flip, either.]  A Corbin will be wider, which
> increases the inseam needed to handle it.  I can hardly imagine mounting
> this thing anyway without stairs on the side; flat-footing it sounds like
a
> job for Andre the Giant.

Actually, when I was taking the 95 Tiger on some dirt roads (e.g. J-8
connector off of Highway 25 at New Idria Mines) I found it awfully tall to
"paddle" sand spots, and too spooky to stand on the pegs at high angles of
descent or ascent.  I ended up having CalBMW/Triumph take 2 inches out of
the seat, but that was only a partial fix, since that effectively tightened
up the seat/footpeg relationship, and raised the bars.  But I had already
put the spacers into the front forks to reduce dive under braking, and I
didn't want to do much more to the chassis/suspension relationship.   I
think your Tiger upgraded a lot of this stuff straight from the factory.
>
> Pshaw, one may say, real men are used to handling seat heights of that
> size...stop with your limp-wristed, lily-livered, quiche-eating pantywaist
> whining!  But the reality is that all the adventure tourer makers have
made
> moves to make lower seat heights possible over the last five years (BMW
and
> Triumph, anyway), and it's one of the typical sales objections.  And KTM
has
> chosen a design which is great for winning the Paris-Dakar, but maybe not
in
> the Streets Of San Mateo [TM].

This is exactly my question.  I'm figuring 85% street, 15% fire trails... no
tough dirt.

>
> Reliability - who knows?  KTM's not bad from what I know, but this is a
new
> model.
>
> But...will this bike be homologated for sale in California?  Does it have
a
> catalytic converter?
>
> It will be interesting to see how this fares.  I'm guessing the target
> market is current KTM riders, and perhaps other aging formerly hard-core
> dirt riders who want something other than an Old Bold Mold Wing but who
> don't want a KLR650...I don't see this demographic, but what do I know?
The
> pale stale males (myself included) who buy adventure tourers probably
don't
> want something this hard-edged.  The supermotard sounds interesting.  At
the
> same time, Triumph may be producing their own motarded Tiger, and there
are
> rumors (OK, one rumor) of a lightened R1150GS later this year.  But, if I
> could predict the future, I'd go to the track and make some real
money...is
> Bay Meadows running?

If BMW would lighten their bike by about 100 lbs, it would be terrific.
The parelever/telelever concept works for me, but the lazy engine, early
redline, and helmet buffeting at any windshield setting of the new model is
unacceptable combined with the porky weight.   The Tiger is a bit better,
but stock suspension doesn't do it for me, yet.   I suppose one answer is to
find a used Tiger, and spend some money on chassis, suspension, and
breathing.

I do have pretty fond memories of the 13,000 miles I put on my 95 Tiger,
including one "lunch trip" to Yosemite in the rain.   Great bike for that
type of travel.

Well, since I'm officially "off" motorcycles,  I have plenty of time to
watch for developments.   Thanks for the input.
>
> Hank Murphy
> 1999 Triumph Tiger "Full Moon"
> DoD#Ultra5
>
>
>

"Grant" <iamshutupyounobjockeybiggles@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bsjo1j$c5l$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
>>
> Given the above, I'd wait and see how two lc4 engines glued together hold
> out.   Personally I'd love an Adventurer and Brackens in the UK even do a
> Motarded version of one - great fun - if a bit heavy.

Thanks for the info.  Does Brackens have a website that you already have
bookmarked?

"Ron Loewy" <rloewy@transport.com> wrote in message
news:uCkHb.65$E17.31@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote
> >
>  > Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?
> >
>
> Try www.ktmtalk.com - there are enough owners there that will give you
some
> info.
>
> I do not have experience with this specific model, but if it is as nice as
> my old Duke - they are a real treat.
>
> Ron.
> --
> '96 KTM Duke

Thanks, I'll use the link.   I've ridden the 640 Duke, which appears to be
what you own.  That bike seemed to have an ADVANTAGE over supersport bikes
on technical asphalt roads IMHO.
>
>

"Ron Loewy" <rloewy@transport.com> wrote in message
news:uCkHb.65$E17.31@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote
> >
>  > Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?
> >
>
> Try www.ktmtalk.com - there are enough owners there that will give you
some
> info.
>
> I do not have experience with this specific model, but if it is as nice as
> my old Duke - they are a real treat.
>
> Ron.
> --
> '96 KTM Duke
>

Thanks again, Ron.  I've joined and posted a request to www.ktmtalk.com as
well.   I'll look forward to seeing responses, although my first glance at
the site makes it appear to be almost exclusively dirt guys on smaller
bikes.  Saw a few 640s for sale with guys moving down to 520s.   Kind of a
different approach from street riders, who usually move up the cc range
: - )
>

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:TklHb.247425$Ec1.8604670@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> Thanks, I'll use the link.   I've ridden the 640 Duke, which appears to be
> what you own.  That bike seemed to have an ADVANTAGE over supersport bikes
> on technical asphalt roads IMHO.

I actually have the 625 (the 640 appeared in '99 IIRC) - but for all
practical purposes it's the same bike. I like it a lot - it works better
than supersports ergonomically for my body.

Ron.
--
'96 KTM Duke

REInvestments wrote in message ...
<snip>
>This I don't like.  My 95 Tiger didn't have very good brakes, and after the
>race replica experience of the past several years, I've grown accustomed to
>excellent brakes.

The brakes on the later Tigers are an improvement.  Steel lines standard,
which I think was not the case with the older Tigers.  Lots of dive with the
stock suspension on my '99 - but I love the compliance on bumpy corners, so
I'm happy with the tradeoff.  Take a test ride if you get a chance, it's not
quite night and day but the later bikes are great.

<snip>
>I've concluded that there is only a certain amount of "fast" that I'm
>capable of with the safety margin I want.   And that's slower than I used
to
>be.   My "need for speed" is satisfied at lower speeds than it used to be.

Other people might call this "wisdom".

>> Range, I'm guessing, will be just under 200 miles per tank on the street.
>
>That's "o.k."  but not great for a twin.

Looks like my guess could be low.  Rider says they got a low of 37 MPG,
average 41 in a riding impression a couple of issues ago which I just read.
But I don't think there were any city streets in that.

<snip>
>Actually, when I was taking the 95 Tiger on some dirt roads (e.g. J-8
>connector off of Highway 25 at New Idria Mines) I found it awfully tall to
>"paddle" sand spots, and too spooky to stand on the pegs at high angles of
>descent or ascent.  I ended up having CalBMW/Triumph take 2 inches out of
>the seat, but that was only a partial fix, since that effectively tightened
>up the seat/footpeg relationship, and raised the bars.  But I had already
>put the spacers into the front forks to reduce dive under braking, and I
>didn't want to do much more to the chassis/suspension relationship.   I
>think your Tiger upgraded a lot of this stuff straight from the factory.

A lot depends on your inseam - mine's 32 inches, and I'm occasionally
marginal.  The suspension on the '99-onward bikes changed a few things which
were issues in the older bikes.  However, I think a lot of Tiger riders play
with the suspension - the geometry of adventure tourers in general seems to
need it.  (Simple-minded me is happy with stock.)  And the newer 955s clean
up the front a bit.

<snip>
>This is exactly my question.  I'm figuring 85% street, 15% fire trails...
no
>tough dirt.

I think the KTM 950 is going to be the clear champ off-road.  However, it's
still a 450-plus-pound bike going offroad, so tough dirt is out unless you
are a really accomplished dirt rider.  (I'm not.)  I wonder about the street
riding.

<snip>
>If BMW would lighten their bike by about 100 lbs, it would be terrific.
>The parelever/telelever concept works for me, but the lazy engine, early
>redline, and helmet buffeting at any windshield setting of the new model is
>unacceptable combined with the porky weight.   The Tiger is a bit better,
>but stock suspension doesn't do it for me, yet.   I suppose one answer is
to
>find a used Tiger, and spend some money on chassis, suspension, and
>breathing.

I think  the newer ones are better in this regard.  With a Tuneboy (laptop
adapter for the Triumph EFI), you can do a lot of tuning, and many of the
Daytona and Speed Triple mappings are useful.

The buffeting seems to be a problem with many of the adventure tourers, not
just BMW and Triumph.  There's a company called Cee Bailey in So. California
that now makes alternative windshields for them.

I second your comments about the GS weight reduction.

>I do have pretty fond memories of the 13,000 miles I put on my 95 Tiger,
>including one "lunch trip" to Yosemite in the rain.   Great bike for that
>type of travel.

Yes, very good all-around bike.  I think this is true of all the adventure
tourers to a degree, certainly of the GS too.

>Well, since I'm officially "off" motorcycles,  I have plenty of time to
>watch for developments.   Thanks for the input.

You're never off.  Just between bikes at the moment.  Good luck and happy
window shopping.

Hank Murphy
1999 Triumph Tiger "Full Moon"
DoD#Ultra5

Brian Wax wrote in message ...
>Some interesting points/thoughts. I have seen several around the bay area
>now. I have not corralled an owner yet to get a sense of he felt about the
>bike. You may be right about being the transition path for battered and
worn
>out dirt riders (me included). This could be why the bike appeals to me
more
>than any other adventurer. I see authentic dirt breeding verses the pseudo
>stuff. I have ridden 21" wheels on the street and never had any handling
>trouble. Then again, if I compare this feature to my Aprilia, it is truly a
>false comparison.

I think BMW and KTM approached this from opposite ends of the spectrum.  BMW
modified a long-distance touring bike to make it feasible to handle a wider
range of roads, and has kept refining it.  Along the way, it became a very
good all-around bike.  Triumph took the concept and built something a little
lighter, a little more powerful, also capable of a wider range of roads, and
built another very good all-around bike.

Guzzi could not make a go of the Quota in this market.  Aprilla and Ducati
added their own interpretations, but both are less dirt-capable than the
first two from what I can gather.  And Suzuki came in with the lowest price
in the category, with still further compromises in the off-road vs. street
area.  And all of these are good all-around bikes.

KTM approached this segment of the market from the other end.  They built an
adventure tourer much more honed for the dirt end of this spectrum.  And
appear to have done a good job of it.

But...who buys adventure tourers?  And how do they use them?  I think the
main use of these is 98% street, 2% dirt...and I may be overstating the dirt
usage.  And the seat and ergonomics of this bike militate against that 98%
part.


>It my be hard for a serious road pilot to make the leap to the adventurer
>bike with 100% dirt heritage.

Yep, my thoughts exactly.  I hope KTM is successful with this bike...but I'm
pretty sure I'm not going to be buying one.  But what do I know?

Hank Murphy
1999 Triumph Tiger "Full Moon"
DoD#Ultra5

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 04:32:09 GMT, "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?   What is the performance, range, handling,
>comfort, and reliability like?
>

you might check out www.advrider.com (yet another message forum)...
advrider is all about Adventure Riding/Touring...  lotsa former BMW GS
owners have gotten the KTM Adventure 950 after exceeding the bigpig's dirt
capabilities (with $$$$ broken parts to show for it).

new section on said forum specifically for KTM Adventure bikes (640 and
950).  http://www.advrider.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=5

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ijlHb.247418$Ec1.8604553@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Grant" <iamshutupyounobjockeybiggles@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bsjo1j$c5l$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> >>
> > Given the above, I'd wait and see how two lc4 engines glued together
hold
> > out.   Personally I'd love an Adventurer and Brackens in the UK even do
a
> > Motarded version of one - great fun - if a bit heavy.
>
> Thanks for the info.  Does Brackens have a website that you already have
> bookmarked?
>

 http://www.bracken.co.uk

HTH

-- 
Grant

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dX7Hb.539907$0v4.22378891@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?   What is the performance, range, handling,
> comfort, and reliability like?


I read the other replies.   Ive never ridden a KTM...good bike though.
Heavy.  Thats an issue if you want to haul ass on the back roads.  You have
lower HP yet heavy... for that kind of bike, not an adrenalin rush to ride.
Workable, but not a fraction as spectacular as a bike  70 to 100 lbs lighter
(thats exponentially better handling...perhaps 300% better handling than
with the extra 100 lbs).....when I looked at some KTMs a year ago, they were
heavy as compared to very lightest 600's on the market.  Under 300 lbs dry
would be tolerable..much over and I myself would pass.


If you wanted something ultra trick, and super light and I believe
registerable on the street since they are under the 50 units sold limits Id
look at www.rotax.com
they have a lighting kit etc.

talk to them.   They sell kit bikes in the 600 to 700cc range, singles, good
for 70 hp or so.   As a kit, you assemble it, cost is about $15,000.. they
will assy it for another $2,500 or so.  This time of year maybe less.  Now
that is a scooter under 250# that will eat the KTM alive on back roads...and
be a lot more fun.  Its not a cruizer though.  It would be for toasting the
boys over the hill from mill valley to the ocean and up highway 9 and over
to Alices..   and it would be a show stopper.   It would be a one of a kind
deal no matter where you took it.

here is a pic.
http://www.rotax.net/Photos/monoshock.jpg

That seat height is 32" I believe.   Notice the cushy pad on it.  :)


Phil Scott



>
>

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:TklHb.247425$Ec1.8604670@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Ron Loewy" <rloewy@transport.com> wrote in message
> news:uCkHb.65$E17.31@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> > "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote
> > >
> >  > Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?
> > >
> >
> > Try www.ktmtalk.com - there are enough owners there that will give you
> some
> > info.
> >
> > I do not have experience with this specific model, but if it is as nice
as
> > my old Duke - they are a real treat.
> >
> > Ron.
> > --
> > '96 KTM Duke
>
> Thanks, I'll use the link.   I've ridden the 640 Duke, which appears to be
> what you own.  That bike seemed to have an ADVANTAGE over supersport bikes
> on technical asphalt roads IMHO.

If you ever ride an under 300# bike with over 35 hp, especially under 250#
with street rubber on it and over 50 hp, on back roads you will be spoiled
for life..not only are they faster, but they are vastly more fun...and
agil...a lot safer as well...you can feel really confident on one of those
with the cuff of your leather almost dragging.    You can stab a boot down
in ultra tight going and kick them back up you have to.

The yamaha  YZ 450cc water cooled single would be a killer ride over the
hill but Yamaha made too many of them to be street legal with that motor.
but they do come with lights, and you can register them for off road.   You
might be able to ride one for years and never get a ticket for running it on
the street.  I dont know what the fine is...but it might well be worth the
risk...the YZ is down to 225 lbs dry now, and with about 45 hp...    put fat
18" rims on it and run wide class C flat track rubber and it will change
your life forever.  Those are about $6,000.

The heavier options will still be fun...but not like something under 250
lbs.


Phil Scott
> >
> >
>
>

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:QHlHb.247508$Ec1.8606533@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Ron Loewy" <rloewy@transport.com> wrote in message
> news:uCkHb.65$E17.31@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> > "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote
> > >
> >  > Anyone have a KTM Adventurer?
> > >
> >
> > Try www.ktmtalk.com - there are enough owners there that will give you
> some
> > info.
> >
> > I do not have experience with this specific model, but if it is as nice
as
> > my old Duke - they are a real treat.
> >
> > Ron.
> > --
> > '96 KTM Duke
> >
>
> Thanks again, Ron.  I've joined and posted a request to www.ktmtalk.com as
> well.   I'll look forward to seeing responses, although my first glance at
> the site makes it appear to be almost exclusively dirt guys on smaller
> bikes.  Saw a few 640s for sale with guys moving down to 520s.   Kind of a
> different approach from street riders, who usually move up the cc range
> : - )

 its a new AMA classification rule driving that change.   You have a hard
time putting 60 hp to the dirt ...so the downsize isnt costing them
anything.

Phil Scott
> >
>
>

>If you wanted something ultra trick, and super light and I believe
>registerable on the street since they are under the 50 units sold limits Id
>look at www.rotax.com
>they have a lighting kit etc.
...
>
>here is a pic.
>http://www.rotax.net/Photos/monoshock.jpg
>

oh yeah, I can see slapping 80 lbs of luggage and gear on that thing and
setting out on a cross country tour... *NOT*

The KTM Adventure 950 is aimed at the same market as the Triumph Tiger and
BMW R1150GS...  adventure touring, long distance self contained travel
thats not confined entirely to paved roads.

http://dirtdog.smugmug.com/photos/1744799-O.jpg
http://dirtdog.smugmug.com/photos/1744807-O.jpg
http://jbsmultimedia.net/rides/saddleback121203/107_0707-6.jpg

"Phil Scott" <philscott@philscott.net> wrote in message
news:bso1s8$1dh$1@news.tdl.com...
>
> here is a pic.
> http://www.rotax.net/Photos/monoshock.jpg
>
> That seat height is 32" I believe.   Notice the cushy pad on it.  :)

Hubba Hubba!!

Luxurious seat.

Who needs a headlight?
They don't work when you are going faster than the speed of light!

Just needs a front brake for that return to "normal space"

RickB

"John R Pierce" <spam@is.invalid> wrote in message
news:2a6vuvojoek9d9giltrufjkhpn5nqp6o1t@news.lmi.net...

>
> The KTM Adventure 950 is aimed at the same market as the Triumph Tiger and
> BMW R1150GS...  adventure touring, long distance self contained travel
> thats not confined entirely to paved roads.
>
> http://dirtdog.smugmug.com/photos/1744799-O.jpg
> http://dirtdog.smugmug.com/photos/1744807-O.jpg
> http://jbsmultimedia.net/rides/saddleback121203/107_0707-6.jpg

Absolutely love these pictures.    Yes, I'm looking at a lighter version of
my vernerable former Triumph Tiger, or much lighter R1150 GS.
>
>
>
>

John R Pierce wrote
>>If you wanted something ultra trick, and super light and I believe
>>registerable on the street since they are under the 50 units sold limits Id
>>look at www.rotax.com
>>they have a lighting kit etc.
>...
>>
>>here is a pic.
>>http://www.rotax.net/Photos/monoshock.jpg
>>
>
>oh yeah, I can see slapping 80 lbs of luggage and gear on that thing and
>setting out on a cross country tour... *NOT*
>
>The KTM Adventure 950 is aimed at the same market as the Triumph Tiger and
>BMW R1150GS...  adventure touring, long distance self contained travel
>thats not confined entirely to paved roads.
>

Bollox.

It/they are aimed at wannabes.  Ffs, in the real world who actually does
that sort of riding?
-- 
steve auvache

"John R Pierce" <spam@is.invalid> wrote in message
news:2a6vuvojoek9d9giltrufjkhpn5nqp6o1t@news.lmi.net...
> >If you wanted something ultra trick, and super light and I believe
> >registerable on the street since they are under the 50 units sold limits
Id
> >look at www.rotax.com
> >they have a lighting kit etc.
> ...
> >
> >here is a pic.
> >http://www.rotax.net/Photos/monoshock.jpg
> >
>
> oh yeah, I can see slapping 80 lbs of luggage and gear on that thing and
> setting out on a cross country tour... *NOT*

 pleeeze read...I said it was not at touring bike...but for hot runs over
the hill from mill valley to the coast.

>
> The KTM Adventure 950 is aimed at the same market as the Triumph Tiger and
> BMW R1150GS...  adventure touring, long distance self contained travel
> thats not confined entirely to paved roads.
>
> http://dirtdog.smugmug.com/photos/1744799-O.jpg
> http://dirtdog.smugmug.com/photos/1744807-O.jpg
> http://jbsmultimedia.net/rides/saddleback121203/107_0707-6.jpg
>
>
>
>

"Ryder Rick" <despaminator@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:vuv7e3s3gtsi3e@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Phil Scott" <philscott@philscott.net> wrote in message
> news:bso1s8$1dh$1@news.tdl.com...
> >
> > here is a pic.
> > http://www.rotax.net/Photos/monoshock.jpg
> >
> > That seat height is 32" I believe.   Notice the cushy pad on it.  :)
>
> Hubba Hubba!!
>
> Luxurious seat.

 Yes indeed...thats 1" of the finest closed cell rubber pipe insulation.

>
> Who needs a headlight?
> They don't work when you are going faster than the speed of light!
>
> Just needs a front brake for that return to "normal space"

    For an additional $2,500 you can get it with a splayed head that some
claim 90 hp for on aviation gas..well over 100 hp on nitro methane.



    Larry needs one of those... he is only 53 you know...not too young to go
flat tracking...thats a very safe sport, no bumps... and very short duration
only 5 minutes or so.   Woods builds those to suit.. for an extra grand you
could get dual discs up front .   I think its better than a compromise
bike.... too heavy to be fun on the dirt, too heavy to be super good on
tight pavement and short on breathtaking HP.

A man needs two bikes..one for short fast rips over the hill and one for
touring...mixing them is like taking your sister along on a date.

Phil Scott


>
> RickB
>
>

"steve auvache" <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote in message
news:CxqS2XGj$57$Ewu2@auvache.force9.co.uk...
> >
>
> Bollox.
>
> It/they are aimed at wannabes.  Ffs, in the real world who actually does
> that sort of riding?
> -- 
> steve auvache

Well it depends on how "long distance" is defined, but I took a prior
Triumph Tiger to Yosemite, and upon return went over Mt. Hamilton in the
snow.   All day, part night ride on dry asphalt, wet, and snow.

I took a Speed Triple through Norcal, Oregon (Grants Pass in pouring rain)
for a three day trip, although I cheated and stayed in a motel with a pot
belly stove to dry out my leathers and gloves.

I did the connector between Mt Madonna 152 and Skyline on the Tiger, which
was several miles of deep gravel.

I took the side roads off of Stage Road on the Tiger.

I did the dirt connector from Highway 25 to J8 over New Idria Mines back
down to Highway 25.

That's not true adventure touring, but  it did seem to work a lot better
with a monster trailie than on most sportbikes.  I tried about 1/4 mile of
mud on the CBR 929 RR, and decided I'd never do it again.

And CalBMW's own Kari leads a number of dirt rides catering to GS riders,
one of which included a sand and water crossing, which I tried on my Speed
Triple, but couldn't pull it off.  (Fort Bragg ride)

That's the kind of thing I was thinking of.

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7pQHb.552999$0v4.22629824@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "steve auvache" <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote in message
> news:CxqS2XGj$57$Ewu2@auvache.force9.co.uk...
> > >
> >
> > Bollox.
> >
> > It/they are aimed at wannabes.  Ffs, in the real world who actually does
> > that sort of riding?
> > -- 
> > steve auvache
>
> Well it depends on how "long distance" is defined, but I took a prior
> Triumph Tiger to Yosemite, and upon return went over Mt. Hamilton in the
> snow.   All day, part night ride on dry asphalt, wet, and snow.
>
> I took a Speed Triple through Norcal, Oregon (Grants Pass in pouring rain)
> for a three day trip, although I cheated and stayed in a motel with a pot
> belly stove to dry out my leathers and gloves.
>
> I did the connector between Mt Madonna 152 and Skyline on the Tiger, which
> was several miles of deep gravel.
>
> I took the side roads off of Stage Road on the Tiger.
>
> I did the dirt connector from Highway 25 to J8 over New Idria Mines back
> down to Highway 25.
>
> That's not true adventure touring, but  it did seem to work a lot better
> with a monster trailie than on most sportbikes.  I tried about 1/4 mile of
> mud on the CBR 929 RR, and decided I'd never do it again.
>
> And CalBMW's own Kari leads a number of dirt rides catering to GS riders,
> one of which included a sand and water crossing, which I tried on my Speed
> Triple, but couldn't pull it off.  (Fort Bragg ride)
>
> That's the kind of thing I was thinking of.


For some reason, I like the vertical twin better for that kind of riding.
it shorter wheel base and lower saddle height maybe?  that would be a big
issue.

A long legged bike in the dirt for someone who isnt real used to it can be a
total pain in the ass.

There are other reasons I like the Triumph but cant put my finger on them.

If I were to go with the KTM it would be a single for sure...then you would
at least have a good weight advantage over the triumph...and that is a big
deal in the dirt especially if you get off onto steep trails or no
trails...which is some real good adventure.   The single though is not going
to burn the highway up.

so Im down with the Tiger Twin on that basis.


Phil Scott

>
>

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 03:30:43 +0000, steve auvache
<dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote:
> John R Pierce wrote
>>
>>The KTM Adventure 950 is aimed at the same market as the Triumph Tiger and
>>BMW R1150GS...  adventure touring, long distance self contained travel
>>thats not confined entirely to paved roads.
>>
>
> Bollox.
>
> It/they are aimed at wannabes.  Ffs, in the real world who actually does
> that sort of riding?

People in New Zealand, for starters.  If you head to places like the
Cardronas, the Coromandel, the Mavora Lakes, and various other prts of
the country there are entensive chunks of gravel and dirt roads, plus
lots of DOC and loggin tracks that are accessible via 4WD or dual
purpose bikes.

The latter is not hard core trail bike/4WD with winch territory, but
it's nothing you'd take a regular road bike or car onto unless you
enjoy getting stuck and ripping chunks out of your vehicle.

A dual purpose bike can very practical over here; hell, people make a
living out of catering to them:
http://www.adventureride.co.nz/tours.html.

-- 
Rodger Donaldson		rodgerd@diaspora.gen.nz

> > It/they are aimed at wannabes.  Ffs, in the real world who actually does
> > that sort of riding?

there are usually around 30 bikes from the bigtrailbikeclub at the Stella
every year, not to mention hundreds of foreign johnnies doing the same
thing... or a bit of trail riding on the big bike, or riding down to the
Cambrian Rally on yer GS to compete and ride home, along with a couple of
hundred other bikes.... small market admittedly, but fun nevertheless :-)

BTW I had a demo on the 950 and it is really,  really good.

bfn,

Tony B

steve auvache <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote in message news:<dYaF8fDeyBEAFwIN@auvache.force9.co.uk>...
> Jason Beren wrote
> >I've owned mine for a little over two years, and have completed the
> >Sheetiron 300 Dualsport twice, with nothing but smiles on my face.
> >However, the garage is getting a little crowded and it's time to thin
> >the heard:
> >
> >1997 KTM 620 Adventure EGS-E
> 
> What colour is it?

All plastics are classic KTM Orange.
Black fork slide protectors.
Clear wind screen.
Blue upholstered saddle.