KTM 690 Enduro released


61 replies to this topic
  • husky123

Posted October 01, 2007 - 04:17 PM

#21

Husky123, it's cool that you have owned both. What are the stronger points, in your opinion, of the XR650R vs TE610, and vice versa? Does the 610 really feel 28lbs heavier? What about suspension differences?


For me the XRR is just a more dirt worthy machine period.

Power: Top end power they are about equal but everywhere else the 650R has more. Way more low end, stronger midrange and again, about the same for the top end power.

Susp.: I'd actually give the edge to the 650R again. Could never get my Zokes dialed.

Smoothness: Husky hands down. That thing is sewing machine smooth.

Ergo's: Once sorted the XRR. The footpegs on the Husky always felt too far back. Stock ergos...they both sucked for taller guys.

Weight: The XR feels lighter. In reality they are both mules. You kinda nudge them and just make sure they are going in the general direction you want them to go and call it happiness.

I really do love my Husky's (hence my username). I've had 5 of them. But the 610 is just a little more softer off-road than the XRR. BUT and a big but the TE comes with e-start and has a plate on the floor. Positive and negatives for both ya know?

  • stringzz

Posted October 01, 2007 - 09:22 PM

#22

For me the XRR is just a more dirt worthy machine period.

Power: Top end power they are about equal but everywhere else the 650R has more. Way more low end, stronger midrange and again, about the same for the top end power.

Susp.: I'd actually give the edge to the 650R again. Could never get my Zokes dialed.


Power: Did you pipe and jet the 610? The stock pipe has a catalytic converter that restricts alot of power. Also, the bore is very similar on both bikes 2mm diff, the xrr has a long stroke, which would mean less bottom end, more top end.

Susp: Hmmm.....

Someone needs to let me ride their xrr for comparison!

It's funny because most people who have owned both or ridden both choose the Husky, you are the first I heard go the other way. I guess it just comes down to the bias of which bike you own. I will still argue that the husky has way better components than the xrr. :confused:

  • weskc35k

Posted October 01, 2007 - 11:57 PM

#23

err,the KTM?

  • husky123

Posted October 02, 2007 - 03:10 AM

#24

Power: Did you pipe and jet the 610? The stock pipe has a catalytic converter that restricts alot of power. Also, the bore is very similar on both bikes 2mm diff, the xrr has a long stroke, which would mean less bottom end, more top end.


Yep rejet and Leo Vince pipe. Oh and despite the specs of the bore and stroke the XR dominates the low end. That's real world vs. looking at paper. Once you come off the Kool Aid you'll be fine.:confused: Wasn't that thread posted in the Husky forum? That may explain some of the opinions....

Sorry for the hijack. Off.

  • VBS-Thumpstar

Posted October 02, 2007 - 07:24 AM

#25

the xrr has a long stroke, which would mean less bottom end, more top end.


Like Husky123 said, It's the other way around.


Sean :confused:

  • martinfan30

Posted October 02, 2007 - 12:09 PM

#26

Power: Did you pipe and jet the 610? The stock pipe has a catalytic converter that restricts alot of power. Also, the bore is very similar on both bikes 2mm diff, the xrr has a long stroke, which would mean less bottom end, more top end.

Susp: Hmmm.....

Someone needs to let me ride their xrr for comparison!

It's funny because most people who have owned both or ridden both choose the Husky, you are the first I heard go the other way. I guess it just comes down to the bias of which bike you own. I will still argue that the husky has way better components than the xrr. :confused:



i thought long stroke = more bottom, less top? and larger bore with small stroke = more top, less bottom.

  • KASUYAHO

Posted October 02, 2007 - 03:22 PM

#27

KTM 690 has a 654cc engine...why are they calling it a 690?


That is just KTM,
They always BS there specs.
KTM's are lighter, make more power.
Till it comes to the real world then there heavier and slower.

  • Scotty Breauxman

Posted October 02, 2007 - 04:57 PM

#28

I can only wonder what they say about the BRP out there on the KTM forums...

  • InternalCombustion

Posted October 02, 2007 - 07:04 PM

#29

The only thing dated about the XR650R is the date it self.
Seven years young and no changes at all except for clutch bushing and graphic's.

And if Honda does replace it.
It has to be better than the 650R. Man will it be a great bike


That's what I keep saying.

Just you wait.

  • XR680RR

Posted October 02, 2007 - 08:07 PM

#30

i hope that's not the end product :confused:


Yes, that is the same bike. Weighing 138kg without fuel, Suspension travel front / rear 250 / 250 mm (9.84 / 9.84") XR650R front/rear 284 mm (11.2 inches) /307 mm (12.1 inches). Inch and a half loss in the front and over 2 iches in the rear of less travel. Street ready (Cat in header, heavier muffler and street stuff) some are saying 152kg for a US bike, same as the SuperMoto version. These are race ready number as claimed on the KTM sight. What Race Ready means is another story. Funny this was hashed out on several threads with rmhrc630 telling all how this was going to be lighter, faster, better, the bike to stomp the XR650R! The dream bike! Couldn't understand why everyone was having a hard time believing that this bike was the big bore answer........Well, where is rmhrc630 now? He is over pestering the CRF450 group about how wonderful the KTM's are. You would think Borynack would be rubbing this in?:confused:

The guy that is kneeling down on the right side of the bike in the bottom picture is Jamie Lanari.


i hope that's not the end product :confused:

this is what i'm hoping for :confused: :confused:
Posted Image
Posted Image


TEST pics:
Posted Image
Posted Image



Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • stringzz

Posted October 02, 2007 - 10:21 PM

#31

i thought long stroke = more bottom, less top? and larger bore with small stroke = more top, less bottom.



I think you are right and I was getting confused, I stand corrected. I do remember reading though in a recent dirt rag that some of the differences in big bore vs long stroke did the inverse of what they thought it would. So, I think valve size has a lot to do with it also. Another thing to consider is that a longer stroke bike (XRR) will have a larger crank, which means more mass and makes the handling more difficult.

back to the 690, this bike is peaking my interest. Anyone know why the 690 SM got FI and the 690 enduro has carb?

  • uncleroby

Posted October 03, 2007 - 05:24 AM

#32

Husky123, it's cool that you have owned both. What are the stronger points, in your opinion, of the XR650R vs TE610, and vice versa? Does the 610 really feel 28lbs heavier? What about suspension differences?


I owned a XR650R 2000 for five years and I love it.
Between TE and XR I would buy the XR!:confused:

But I have to tell you that the TE is heavier because of the electric start and the battery.
Dallara, the Italian XR importer installed the ES on the 650, result: it has the same weight than the TE: 143 kilograms without gas, both with dual sport/street kit.
The XR650 has 4 HP more and more torque but the TE is easier to control off road especially on slippery trails.

The Honda general quality is the best (as usual)!

  • x400r

Posted October 03, 2007 - 03:00 PM

#33

Now ya gotta find a place that sells 10w60 oil??? I like the KTM but Honda and the others should build something comparable

  • RickyPanecatyl

Posted October 03, 2007 - 10:23 PM

#34

Husky 123 or anybody else have thoughts on riding the XRR on the road? I noticed you said the Husky was much smoother than the Honda.
I'm replacing a 10 year old KTM LC4 that vibrates horribly on the highway but the mag tests I've read on the 690 SM say it's the smoothest big cylinder. I use my bike for EVERYTHING ... going to work in traffic everyday, 200 mile road trips, firetrails, slippery single track in the jungle, "playing" on a mx track etc.

I can only get 1 bike every 5 years. (Long story - I'm an American living in Malaysia where anyone of these bikes costs a full 3X as much. With my visa I can ship 1 bike over every 5 years and not have to pay the 170% import tax.)

If I got the XR, I'd have to add e start. (Trying to hot start a bike that stalled at a light on a 4 lane Asian highway is not safe!)

Does anybody know how much weight it adds to the XRR to add a Baja Designs E start and dual sport kit?

One thing that concerned me about the XRR is a magazine test I read on it said they only got 27 mpg? I was hoping the KTM was going to have FI and be competitive with BMW's X challenge 55 numbers I read... If that was true, your "real world" weight for being ready to ride 150 miles would add 24 lbs to a bike that got 27 mpg. I don't know though, they might have got the bmw's numbers on the highway and the XR's thrashing it off road. Anybody ever check mileage on the XR?

Last question ... it looks like the KTM's got about 12 - 16 more hp than the honda. I know there are lots of ways to get more out of the Honda, but are they still reliable?

  • pman13

Posted October 04, 2007 - 04:12 AM

#35

I use my XRR every day to ride to work and I also ride some trails, and a lot high speed dirt roads/two track. In my opinion its the best "dual sport" bike out there. I don't find it too harsh to ride, but it would definitely be better over 80mph with a steering stabilizer. I don't have an e-start and in a year of riding and over 4,000 miles I only stalled it once on the road and that was the first month I had it. I'm usually getting 32-37 mpg which is better than the mags, but I'm still looking to get a bigger tank so I can actually more than 60 miles before I'm out of gas.

  • DuncanL

Posted October 04, 2007 - 03:47 PM

#36

That is just KTM,
They always BS there specs.
KTM's are lighter, make more power.
Till it comes to the real world then there heavier and slower.


That's right! That's why the 990 Adventure is only 999cc, the 560 SMR is 565cc, etc... :confused: Or perhaps KTM are just not the best at choosing model numbers for their bikes. But they're better than the dyslexic Triumph and their old 595, with 955cc :confused:

  • BWB63

Posted October 06, 2007 - 05:25 PM

#37

Yes, that is the same bike. Weighing 138kg without fuel, Suspension travel front / rear 250 / 250 mm (9.84 / 9.84") XR650R front/rear 284 mm (11.2 inches) /307 mm (12.1 inches). Inch and a half loss in the front and over 2 iches in the rear of less travel. Street ready (Cat in header, heavier muffler and street stuff) some are saying 152kg for a US bike, same as the SuperMoto version. These are race ready number as claimed on the KTM sight. What Race Ready means is another story. Funny this was hashed out on several threads with rmhrc630 telling all how this was going to be lighter, faster, better, the bike to stomp the XR650R! The dream bike! Couldn't understand why everyone was having a hard time believing that this bike was the big bore answer........Well, where is rmhrc630 now? He is over pestering the CRF450 group about how wonderful the KTM's are. You would think Borynack would be rubbing this in?:confused:

The guy that is kneeling down on the right side of the bike in the bottom picture is Jamie Lanari.


Well, I have nothing to rub in. The Hard drive took a dump and I am finaly close to back to full computer speed. I was email only for a while. I think I read that the down-under XR bike is over 100 pounds heavier the ours or something like that so, in the end the KTM would look ok on paper. Yes, on some of the other posts about this new? KTM are quite reDICK-u-lous. The ranting of this XR650R butt-kicking KTM is a major joke.

  • CWO4GUNNER

Posted October 06, 2007 - 06:25 PM

#38

I am considering buying a new 07 XRR for $5600 OTD as a bigger DS bike and have been looking at the specs making comparisons to other bikes friends own that I have owned. The only thing that seems to be dated to me is the engine displacement to power output due in part to the obvious lower compression ratio. Higher ratios built into most newer enduro bikes these days. Also the perceived front end heavy feel owners have described to me. The last negative which to me is actually a positive is that the general engineering like the aluminum frame and other things has has made it a champion for so long suggest that Honda with just a few modifications could probubly make this bike a top contender again.

So I am reluctant as it is way overdue or a few but very impacting changes that only Honda can engineer and probubly is already considering. But I don't see an 08 models in there line up so I wonder if 07 is it for the XR650R or will Honda do like Suzuki and Kawasaki and stop production of the XR650R for a year only to unveil a new Super XR700R or CRF700X that will blow away the other heavies like bowling pins with FI , steering stabilizer, a lighter engine and frame. Honda already has the experiences in this bike being a first in its class when released, I just cant see Honda throwing away all that experiences when their is a growing market for this class of bike, so I might have to wait another year so I don't get my feelings hurt.

  • weskc35k

Posted October 07, 2007 - 02:52 AM

#39

Can't see a problem buy new or a good 2nd hand one and trade when the new bike has proved itself after a season or 2.
I don't think you'll buy an XR650.

  • Becher

Posted October 10, 2007 - 10:57 AM

#40

The KTM 65 SXC destroys the XR 650r hands down. To bad they don't keep importing them to the US. :confused: Best bike for the big four stroke class!!!





Related Content

 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.