The clash of dual-sport/ADV 650 thumpers | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

The clash of dual-sport/ADV 650 thumpers

Which is best for which road?

  • City/HWY - Honda XR650

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • City/HWY - Kawasaki KLR650

    Votes: 4 26.7%

  • City/HWY - Suzuki DR650

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • Gravel/Dirt roads - Honda XR650

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Gravel/Dirt roads - Kawasaki KLR650

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • Gravel/Dirt roads - Suzuki DR650

    Votes: 1 6.7%

  • Off road/trail - Honda XR650

    Votes: 1 6.7%

  • Off road/trail - Kawasaki KLR650

    Votes: 1 6.7%

  • Off road/trail - Suzuki DR650

    Votes: 2 13.3%
  • Total voters
    15
DemonPig said:
Which tires do you guys use for more touring oriented riding on these bikes? As in 80-20 ratio or similar (road/off-road).
[..]If I'm riding 70% pavement, 25% gravel and 5% trails hypothetically[..]
Click to expand...

The problem I find is that there is very little correlation between percentage usage vs tire rating. It doesn't matter if you rode 100 kms to get to the trails - when you're in knee-deep in sand, you're 100% still going to want a dirtbike tire. When you're at max lean railing around a smooth asphalt canyon road, you're 100% going to want a Supercorsa.

So it all depends how comfortable vs compromised you want to be on the road vs dirt, not what percentage of time you'll be spending doing either. On our current tour, we are definitely 95/5, maybe even more road than that. We initially started out with Tourances, which like Anakees are 90/10 tires, but the minute the hard pack became the slightest bit gnarlier, we might as well have been running slicks. Granted this might have something to do with the weight of our luggage and where we were carrying it.

We switched to Heidenau K60s, which are supposed to be a 50/50. Sure, they are slightly more squidgier at lean in high-speed corners and they grip wet asphalt like they were coated with a mixture of armorall and snot, but for our applications, the 2% or 5% of the time that we're riding in sand, mud or volcanic ash, it's better to have that 50/50 tread than wobble around on a sport-touring tire with dual-sport pretensions.

My concern is not wanting to change the rear tire every 2-3,000km.
Click to expand...

What you might want to consider is having a more aggressive tire up front for handling and a dual-sport tire in the rear for wear. The ADVRider guys seem to like TKC80s up front and a K60 rear. Those Heidis last an extremely long time, so you'll probably be changing the TKC and the K60 at the same time with that combination (or even the TKC first!).

Just my $0.02.
 
I wondered about that idea of more agressive on the front.
Thanks for insight.

Just now so happy with the Dunlop 606s I might just stick with them.

Also good to know about the K60s in rain.

••


hah just watching travel photos while I work and found that runoff gutter...



was tired and not paying attention.....coming from left to right edging past the downed tree which was not cut up at the time and should not have let the bike go into the gutter.....

Looked innocent....not going fast...front tire did NOT want to climb out and was headed over the edge just where the front wheel of the parked KLR is.
Got a good adrenalin hit from that and went back the next day to look.
Since it was downhill and slippy small gravel not likely the KLR would have gotten stopped in time.

Rangers had cleaned up the tree....I actually brought a piece home as a reminder to pay attention...

Got the Dunlops on the front very shortly thereafter and really like the fact the front goes exactly where I point it.

Only one gutter it would not climb out as was soft sand edges with no bite but was no issue either.

Better front tire might have saved my green moss adventure as well....damn shoulder still is not quite healed up. Front end wash outs are no fun at all.
 
Last edited:
Lightcycle said:
What you might want to consider is having a more aggressive tire up front for handling and a dual-sport tire in the rear for wear. The ADVRider guys seem to like TKC80s up front and a K60 rear. Those Heidis last an extremely long time, so you'll probably be changing the TKC and the K60 at the same time with that combination (or even the TKC first!)
Click to expand...

I used to run a TKC80 in the front and a Tourance on the rear and it was a really good fit for riding on twisty paved roads mixed in with loose gravel on atv trails up north. For tire life, the TKC80 on the front gave me about 8-9k while I got somewhere around 16k off the Tourance rear. The TKC 80's have surprisingly excellent grip on pavement and even on wet roads.
 
I concur with Shane and Lightcycle. I've had a variety of tires on my Sertao and the best "all around" combo so far has been the TKC80 front and Heideneau K60 rear. I'm a fairly lean 145 pounds and don't seem to be hard on my tires so I was able to go 20,000kms on the rear and 14,000kms on the front; crazy mileage. Neither tire was bald but, for off road purposes, could have been changed a few thousand kilometers sooner. Still, fantastic mileage.

I recently swapped out a Michelin T63 front but wasn't too fond of it, especially in deep gravel. The rear T63 is really good. Neither of the Michelin's will get you half the mileage of the TKC/Heideneau combo. I think, once I'm done with the TKC80 front and back, I'll try a rear Mitus with the TKC80 front.

Like Lightcycle says, the on road/off-road percentages are meaningless for adventure tires. In many ways, while the TKC80 is a full knobby tire "50/50" tire, I've found it sticks to pavement every bit as good as the Tourance I started out with (a "90/10" tire) and miles better off road. The ability of your tires off-road come down to weight of the bike and your ability to let the bike get loose below you while maintaining general control.
 
That's all very good info. Thank you guys!

I'll most likely go with a KLR unless a DR with a larger tank, a windscreen and seat comes up for the same price. Wish DR had a tach gauge.
I may have to wait to sell my house first so I have money for it but I'll be checking kijiji anyhow. Sometimes one can find crazy deals, especially out of the city.
 
yeah depends on your mix of riding. i run a 606 rear and mt43 front. great for offroading and decent on the streets....the earplugs block most of the howling when on the highway. really surprised at the wear i get out of them 4k and counting, barely worn. although i do pressure up and down depending on my riding
 
Yeah - I'm surprised how well the 606s are hanging in tho riding on wet pavement helps.

They sure do howl tho.

We ride with Scalas and buddy was complaining how loud it was in HIS helmet transmitted via the microphone :D
 
Lightcycle said:
The problem I find is that there is very little correlation between percentage usage vs tire rating. It doesn't matter if you rode 100 kms to get to the trails - when you're in knee-deep in sand, you're 100% still going to want a dirtbike tire. When you're at max lean railing around a smooth asphalt canyon road, you're 100% going to want a Supercorsa.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think I was approaching it with the wrong mindset. That's a solid observation.

Do you guys ever feel a difference when it comes to using tubeless tires with tubes? And are they hard to take off? Or do you prefer to sticking with tires designed for tubes?
I am used to doing my own tire changes but have never dealt with tubes at all. Even on a bicycle, never changed a tire yet. Only ride it once or twice a year while camping so the rubber has lasted about 20 years.

Anyone familiar with DR650 - which aftermarket fuel tanks worked best for you? I like the KLR's range - seems to be a bit more than what I'm used to having on the VFR, which is great.
 
IMS tank. No problems to report. 1.5 US gal. over stock.
 
I like the KLR's range - seems to be a bit more than what I'm used to having on the VFR, which is great.
Click to expand...

Be a bit cautious on the range as the tank design leaves fuel stranded. ( worst case you lay the bike down on the fuel line side and spill it over or

That said the range is very good and can be ginormous

klrsafari.jpeg
 
I always question the wisdom of poorly designed products and then refuse to buy them. I think that's on a flow chart somewhere. Fuel below petcock comes to mind.
 
DemonPig said:
Do you guys ever feel a difference when it comes to using tubeless tires with tubes? And are they hard to take off? Or do you prefer to sticking with tires designed for tubes?
Click to expand...

I've only ever run tubeless on my street bikes and only tubed on my dirtbike.

You can drop the inflation on a tubed tire very low without the tire slipping or coming off the bead, but on our touring bikes, I don't know if I'd ever need or want to run as low as 10 psi, even on the looser stuff. When we drop the psi on the Heidenaus (as low as 22 psi) it's not *that* noticeable because the carcass is so stiff. On the Tourances they did make a little bit more of a difference.

I know some touring guys that carry tubes with them so if there's damage to their tubeless tires that can't be plugged with string or mushrooms, they can slip the tube in and continue riding. But I don't think they run tubes all the time, merely as a failsafe. After all, something that will slice up the carcass is probably going to tear into a tube underneath as well.
 
I always question the wisdom of poorly designed products and then refuse to buy them. I think that's on a flow chart somewhere. Fuel below petcock comes to mind.
Click to expand...

ummm the KLR 650 is one of the best selling models of all time so there goes your theory .

To keep the weight down and a big tank a couple of litres sits on the offside -

Not sure how that larger tank works.
 
MacDoc said:
ummm the KLR 650 is one of the best selling models of all time so there goes your theory .
Click to expand...

It's not a theory, I honestly don't like to buy poorly designed stuff. No joy. Other people can do as they please.
 
You prefer to have a smaller tank then?? ....- higher C of G??

all designs are trade offs ....this is one they made and it's a very very successful model worldwide.
 
MacDoc said:
You prefer to have a smaller tank then?? ....- higher C of G??

all designs are trade offs ....this is one they made and it's a very very successful model worldwide.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I follow. Does the Safari tank leave unusable fuel or not? If yes, it's a bad design. If no, then I misunderstood your post. Looking at the forward portion, it appears to be lower than the petcock. I see a pocket to the rear. Is one supposed to swish the last bit back into that pocket?

The first IMS tank I bought in 1997 for DR350 left about 1/2 litre unusable on either side unless riding up a 30 deg. incline. There's no good reason for that. I got a full refund.
 
I'm talking the stock tank on the pre 2008.

I suspect Safari has made some provision for crossing fuel between the sides.
Some riders have figure a way as well for the stock tank.

Riding off road, fuel will splash over but of the 21 litres it holds ....apparently about 1.5 litres can get stranded in the other side of the tank.....enough to save the day maybe.

Since they did not bother to change it over 20 years....seems more of niggle than a design fault.
 
MacDoc said:
I'm talking the stock tank on the pre 2008.

I suspect Safari has made some provision for crossing fuel between the sides.
Some riders have figure a way as well for the stock tank.

Riding off road, fuel will splash over but of the 21 litres it holds ....apparently about 1.5 litres can get stranded in the other side of the tank.....enough to save the day maybe.

Since they did not bother to change it over 20 years....seems more of niggle than a design fault.
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought you were talking about the Safari in the picture as you can clearly see the fuel level. Shape of the pre '08 tank may be due to the rad guards needing to blend in or something. Yes lots of designs incorporate a compromise, I get that. But the IMS tank for the DR350 I mentioned was moulded to resemble the stock steel tank and the little plastic bits under the forward front. Somebody made a judgement call there that I didn't agree with.
 
personally i fail to see the glamour of having a enormous fuel tank for everyday riding. the dr650 range is roughly 160km to reserve, i have traveled on some long rides and never once did i regret having to stop, fill up and stretch every hour and a half. i do mount on a rotopack or two when i go above algonquin for peace of mind, and actually prefer having the weight down lower on my saddlebag rack instead of up high in the tank. if i lived in the Austrailian outback, or was regularly travelling to the Yukon or James Bay, then i would definitely look into a 30l safari tank
 
the dr650 range is roughly 160km to reserve,
Click to expand...

That's very low even for Pennsylvania twists riding...you get into any boonies on a Sunday and you got a potential problem ....let alone annoying riding buddies.

Carring additional fuel I think is way more annoying than having decent range in the first place
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom