View Single Post
Old 09-21-2012, 07:19 PM   #52648
MeefZah
Curmudgeonly
 
MeefZah's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Location: New Philadelphia, Ohio
Oddometer: 10,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruppster View Post
Supposedly that's when the bulk of the problems began. I guess I read that it was when the body style changed, must have misread or had a bad source. Just did some more research and it appears 2002 was the change.
FWIW the doohickey in my 93 was broken when I upgraded it. The broken piece was in the crankcase. It does seem I've read about more oil burners in the new body style.
I'm not much of a rider (still learning to ride), but it didn't me long to feel a few shortcomings of the stock KLR, all around its decent and I'm sure a good rider would be able to take it many more places than I.
Total dead horse flogging but the KLR is a great bike in theory.

Kaw's failing is that they tried to keep it so cheap that they ended up making a shitty bike. If it was $500 more, and Kaw spent that money on the needed upgrades and left their profit margin as it is, it'd be a true bargain and a world class bike.

Fix the doohickey and spring, install sealed wheel bearings, fix the breaking subframe issues, fix the breaking footpeg issues, make the chain adjusters more dirt bikey, little better suspension, better brakes. For new models add FI, a nicer digital dash (with a fucking clock). Try and shave some weight but that's really not a necessity.

They tried a little in 2008 with new plastics, headlights, beefier wheels, better brakes; but still the doohickey issue; and now the oil burning issue.
__________________
"A man turns his back on the comforts of home, and when the dust all settles and the story is told, history is made by the side of the road..." - DBT

My Smugmug Galleries
MeefZah is offline   Reply With Quote