From: owner-klr650-digest@lists.xmission.com (klr650-digest) To: klr650-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: klr650-digest V2 #142 Reply-To: klr650 Sender: owner-klr650-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-klr650-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk klr650-digest Wednesday, March 17 1999 Volume 02 : Number 142 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:43:12 -0700 From: "Kurt Simpson" Subject: (klr650) NKLR...Tom's R100GS Part IV... Well OK, it's tuned for torque, right? Sort of. What BMW DID do, and here is my ONE PRINCIPLE MAIN, PISSES ME OFF MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, GRIPE about the bike: The gearing. BMW took their standard transmission ratios, that they used on every boxer twin, and just put 10% lower gearing on the rear end. Period. 10%, I'm sorry, is not enough to be a real help in the tight and terrible, but it *is* enough to be a major drag on the highway. They might as well have left fourth gear out of the tranny altogether, because fourth and fifth were so close as to only make about 100-200 rpm difference at cruising speed. Instead of enjoying the pleasant pulsing power throbs of a big twin on the highway, I felt like I was on some wound-out Honda 90. And the mileage sucked. I never got better than about 36 mpg. One trip, where I just nailed it for an hour in the desert somewhere, letting it sit on 110 mph (I was tired and wanted to get there), I drained the tank dry in 100 miles. What this type of bike needs, IMHO, is a real LOW "granny" gear for first gear, for those deep nasty sand washes that suck the rear wheel down, and a real HIGH "overdrive" top gear for easy loping on the highway. Not some close ratio road-racer gear box. I think this is another instance of BMW being plain old cheap, despite their reputation. This is re-inforced by noting that other companies adjust their gear ratios to suit the application, and don't try to make "one size fits all" compromises. Furthermore, there are German after-market companies, I once had a catalog, that manufacture "granny" lows and "overdrive" top gears, for the Boxers, and this would be the hot ticket. BMW take notice: throw the accountants out, or make them ride the bikes. By the way, I note that the new R1100GS still shares the exact same tranny as every other 1100, even the much taller geared RS. Sorry, BMW, but this still is lame. To top it off, I was never really comfortable on the bike for long stretches. The pegs were too high, and my legs would cramp. I had a Corbin seat, that was OK, but kind of restrictive too, and increased knee bend as well. And, NO PLACE TO PUT A PAIR OF DAMN HIGHWAY PEGS ON A BOXER!!!!! Especially the GS with the silly oil cooler over the right cylinder. I would ride with legs propped up on the crash bars, and oil cooler, but comfy, it was not. There are trips I would have killed for some place else to put my feet. Summary: I bet you thought I'd never shut up. Despite the above, I do have some great memories of the GS. There were some fine and fast fire roads in Arizona, and the thing was a blast to ride on them, despite bottoming out on the jumps and occasional rocks, grinding parts and plumbing and such. Also, I used to live on a dirt road, and there was a deep sand wash gully across it, with good visibility, which I would habitually hit at 40 or 50, catching good air, with a nice stable landing, much sweeter than my /6 ever was, (we won't mention the XR350). And if you popped the clutch hard enough, you could, get the front end to come up pretty good in first gear, much better than my V-Max... When I bought that bike I thought I'd own it 20 years. After 2 1/2 years, and 28,000 mostly mediocre miles I was ready to let it go. I hope the new owner loves the poor thing more than I did. It never looked or sounded so good as when I watched him test ride it around the parking lot... Mercifully signing off... Tom Meagher R100GS--> XLCH --> V-Max ---> A13 (my lucky number?) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 11:44:43 -0500 (EST) From: Eric Winslow Subject: (klr650) Re: klr650-KLR longevity: Oil level > 4. Maintain engine oil level above the window (add 10-12 ounces when you see a bubble > in the glass) What's the story w/10 or 12 ounces more when you see a bubble? How was this determined? Eric ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:52:29 -0700 From: "Pokluda, Gino F" Subject: RE: (klr650) NKLR..Tom's R100 story Tom, You miss the point. It's a BMW. Gino, a former BMW owner too, Pokluda ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:56:52 -0700 From: "Kurt Simpson" Subject: Re: (klr650) Re: klr650-KLR longevity: Oil level >> 4. Maintain engine oil level above the window (add 10-12 ounces when you see a bubble >> in the glass) > >What's the story w/10 or 12 ounces more when you see a bubble? How was >this determined? > >Eric Why Eric, I'm so glad you asked, it is leprechaun day isn't it..., it originally comes from Eldon Carl and I've confirmed it on my own bike. If you change your oil and add oil slowly you will hit the top of the sight glass at 2 qts. 7 ounces -- 10-12 ounces before the recommended change amount of 2 qts. 19 ounces. This means that when you hit the sight glass you are already 10 ounces low. Eldon makes up for this by adding 4 ounces every 1,000 miles after an oil change (the amount his bike and mine uses) at 1,000, 2,000 and then he changes it at 3,000. For complete info...order back issue of Kawasaki 650 Dual Sport News...March/April 1998. Kurt Salt Lake City ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 12:05:47 -0500 From: "J.Taylor" Subject: Re: (klr650) Kamloops Rally Where can I find more out about this rally. I'd just like to read about it..... Jake ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:17:05 -0700 From: "Kurt Simpson" Subject: Re: (klr650) Kamloops Rally...NKLR - -----Original Message----- From: J.Taylor To: KLR650@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, March 17, 1999 10:00 AM Subject: Re: (klr650) Kamloops Rally >Where can I find more out about this rally. I'd just like to read about >it..... > >Jake > >-----Original Message----- From: Gerald Schwartz (by way of Ged Schwartz <>) <> To: BMW -GS motorcycles mailing list <> Date: Saturday, March 13, 1999 12:18 AM Subject: BC Canyons Rally '99 >GSer's, > >I posted this a few months back and wish to make one final post...if you >are already a confirmed registrant or have no interest in a British >Columbia dual purpose ride in late July, please hit your trash icon ... >thanks for the patience: > >BC CANYONS RALLY 99 > >>This is an invitation for adventure riders: > >While riding with a gang of 50 other GSers ( a few 650's and one guy on his >new Triumph street rocket...[he said he left the GS at home]) last summer >for three days of Idaho backroads on the way to the Missoula National (big >thanks to Mike from Boise), I decided it would be a lot of fun to share >some of British Columbia's best riding with those interested in backroading. > >>Here is the concept: This rally will be limited to a maximum of 20 riders >who want to participate in a 3-5 day ride through a variety of canyons, >forest service roads, some primo paved sections, and some "on your pegs" >terrain. Each rider should have intermediate riding skills, be able to read >good maps (a compass may help sometimes), be "self-reliant" and adventurous, >choose to either camp or rent accommodations (each evening will offer dinner >and the choice of camping or renting accommodation at local inns), and be >ready to ride along river canyons, desert (we have cactus in BC as well as >snow, eh!), 4-wheel roads, mountain passes, and most excellent scenery. >> >>The dates for the rally are from July 26 - 30th, 1999 (full moon on the >28th). The rally will convene in Kamloops, BC on the evening of July 25th >for socializing and discussing the tour's outline. Each day will offer 150 - >300 kms of riding and end with supper being provided. Each day's ride has >optional pavement routes or good gravel roads as alternate routes for those >who wish to vary their riding. >> >>Those who register for the rally will receive the following: >> * Rally itinerary; >> * EXCELLENT maps with routes highlighted and pertinent detailed >guide notes; >> * accommodation information so participants can reserve their own >> lodging should they choose not to camp; >> * locations for gas along route to be identified; >> * suppers will be provided each night; >> * breakfast (coffee, fruit,and muffins) will be provided each >morning; >> * campsite costs are covered for tenters; >> * probably some other crap also included. >> * recommended "approach routes" for riders from out-of-province >> so you can check out stupendous riding to and from this rally. >> > ** Fantastic maps are being provided with the gracious generosity of >MUSSIO VENTURES LTD...publishers of BC's BEST backroad map books. ** > >>This project is intended to be a cost-recovery project and IS NOT a >commercial tour... we organize the basics so you can enjoy the ride and >know that showers, campsights and supper are waiting at the end of your >day's ride. >> >>The cost will be $150 Canadian (about $100 US), eh? >> >>The route travels west from Kamloops, through old Hudson Bay trade routes >and Caribou Gold Rush trails, and will travel primarily by gravel and dirt >roads (some pavement is necessary for small stretches) through the towns of > >Cache Creek, Spences Bridge, Pavillion, Clinton, Bralorne, and Lilooet >(these are the major gas stops). The 3-day ride will leave riders a few >hours from Pemberton/Whistler (North America's top ski resort [w/glacier >skiing in July]), and the 5-day ride brings riders either back to Kamloops >or with the option to go to Vancouver or the Okanagan Valley. > >This ride offers some of BC's best riding in terms of some good paved sport >sections, and a lot of off-slab roads. An alternate route which is >primarily paved for those who don't want the gravel/dirt components will be >marked out on the maps ....this alternate route ends up at the same >location each evening as the dirt riders ... the third night will be at >Tyax Lodge and will require about 1-2 hours riding on GOOD gravel road from >Lillooet...and the same to ride out the next day...either to Pemberton or >back to Lillooet by gravel. > >You don't need to be Helge Pederson to join the alternate route (but he can >come for free if he wants!) > >>We are floating this invitation out to you so you can consider next >summer's riding plans now. More basic information can be obtained from me >(Ged Schwartz) at "" Registration packages (maps, >etc) will be mailed to interested parties who e-mail their addresses > >There are some vacancies remaining...so far the long distance award goes to >*** from Arkansas...unless Erwin makes it across the Bering Straights on >his Russian route from Germany. > >Registration cut-off date is May 31. > >Thanks for letting me clutter up the list with this post. > >Ged Schwartz >Kamloops, BC >(250) 372-0550 >81-80GS >96 1100GSABS > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 12:41:26 EST From: KenReither@aol.com Subject: (klr650) Re: klr650-digest V2 #140 Question from the new guy on the block: Regarding oil levels, some say keep the oil in the KLR650 10 to 12 oz above the top line of the sight glass. Another says there's a Kawasaki Technical Bulletin of April 1, 1998 #1050-01 which I gather says adding oil above the sight glass causes excess pressure that blows a seal out and voids any remaining warranty. On my 99 LKR650, if I add 10 to 12 oz above the top line in my sight glass, that means I am adding 2.9 to 3.0 qt instead of 2.6 recommended by my owners manual when I change oil and filter. Why is adding the 10 to 12 extra ounces is a good idea? Is the sight glass misplaced on the engine? Does anyone have a copy of that Technical Bulletin that they can post? Ken Reither Kingwood, TX (Houston) 99 KLR650 with 600 miles (The riding is great this time of the year.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 11:00:55 -0700 From: "Pokluda, Gino F" Subject: RE: (klr650) Re: klr650-digest V2 #140 >>On my 99 LKR650, if I add 10 to 12 oz above the top line in my sight glass, that means I am adding 2.9 to 3.0 qt instead of 2.6 recommended by my owners manual when I change oil and filter.<< This is a very good point. Eldon based his findings on a pre 96 KL650 engine which takes 2.5 Liters of oil. The 96 and up models have a larger clutch and flywheel which, in theory, would displace some of the oil capacity. My manual states 2.5 Liters. I have heard listers with 96 and up models quoting quarts. We need to research this a bit more before we continue with the 10 oz above the sight glass rule. Gino ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 05:10:21 +1000 From: Ted Palmer Subject: Re: (klr650) Braking Physics (NKLR) Jeff & Lisa Walker wrote: [...] > Pressure is equal to force divided by the area. The > pressure is different on the input side (brake lever) than the output side, > as the areas of the pistons is different. I don't agree with this one. If this is hydraulic pressure, the pressure of the fluid, then it will be the same enough everywhere in the system, whether at the master cyl or caliper. [...] > You take a smaller force, and move it through a greater distance. Good ol' leverage. > Obviously > this isn't practical as the brake lever can only move so far. Design > considerations that are determined by how much tolerance you need at the > calipers for the brakes to slip without too much friction when the brakes > aren't applied. Yeah. Disc runout, caliper seal flex, non linearity of pad friction etc. > Another poster stated that by adding a larger brake pad the area of the > output side has increased. I don't believe this to be true, since the fluid > pressure is acting on the caliper piston's area, not on the brake pad > directly. Yeah, but differing pad area will affect the pressure of the pad material on the disc. Everyone seems to be assuming that pad/disc friction is linear with pad pressure and temp, which in real life rarely, if ever, is. But everyone has to assume this or their calculations get _way_ too complicated. We are also assuming that a twin disc setup had the same caliper, master cyl, pad dimensions and material as a single disc setup, which is not necessarily the case in practice. [...] > So you see, all > of the extra work done by friction can either be converted to kinetic energy > and actually stop the brake faster, or be converted to waste heat, which is > a bad thing and causes the brakes to fade. This I don't get. Braking converts your bike's motion into heat and to chewing out the pads and rotor, and sometimes making neat whizzing sounds. The vast majority of the energy goes into making heat, judging by how long pads and rotors last. To brake, you make heat and slowly tear up a couple of sliding surfaces. There's not much more to it than that. Besides, heat is just kinetic energy on a molecular level. What is "waste heat"? Heat the brakes can't get rid of fast enough? > As you can tell, this is a very interesting subject for me. I think that I > am going to try and use university resources to study this further. Good luck, you'll need it. Do university resources _really_really_ understand just how bikes stay upright in the first place? Mister_T ------------------------------ End of klr650-digest V2 #142 ****************************