Why does the KLR engine suck in HP

If your looking for (HP) value for money spent don't stop at 685cc. For little more you can go with 705 or if they make a bigger piston go for it. The DR 650 is being bored out to 790cc with great reliability and the extra torque is worth a lot. While you have it apart clean up the ports for a good gain in mid-range to top end for no money at all. I spent a couple hours in the head of my DR (my first ever 4 stroke porting effort- although I used to port my (2 stroke mx bikes) and it really felt better on the top end with nothing lost on the bottom. Cost was zero as I just cleaned up the passageways- no polishing involved. The next focus is the cam if you still have cash left. Last- look into larger valves, but this is a big project on these heads. Next time I take my DR apart I'm going to simply bore out the valve seat material using the same valves. This will open up the size of the port into the cylinder maybe just 5% in diameter but the overall effect will be greater because of the increase in volume through that circumference. You may have to increase the cooling capacity as the determining factor to radiator size is basically horsepower and not cc"s. I saw an article years ago where a KLR owner installed two radiators if I remember correctly.
Most will tell you to upgrade to a different bike especially since the new Husky is only $500 more than the new KLR, but one advantage to the existing KLR is you can add power as your budget allows. After these increases you would of course want to upgrade the exhaust to take advantage of the other effects.

Might of been the case in the 90s, but not now. I'd put KTMs RFS bike up against any KLR any day of the week..

While Japanese motorcycle makers have been asleep, Euro designers have overtaken the dual sport market. The 08 KLR "redesign" didn't help.

as it has been said, if you don't want or need to go 0-60 under 3 seconds in the dirt, the KLR is a good option, if you want to go to alaska with a well set up bike capable of going there and returning, the KLR will, communing, a lite 2 up bike (for mid size people, so no over 350 lbs couple) and maintenance schedule that won't brake the bank, the KLR is a good option.

IF you want faster I guess the KTM is much better also the 990R but how much does it cost?

All bikes have trade offs, so pick what you want the most.

When I bough my KLR I wanted a bike that did a lot at a fair price. I did not know about FI vs Carb and now 7 years latter, I have not care about that. I have change sprockets, chains and brake paths, plus the oil and filters, and lets not forget tires (that cost me like 50-70 USD). All in 40,000 miles.

Cheers

Damasovi

A number isn't what I'm striving for, better drive ability is the better way of putting it.

I really like my KLR actually and another bike is 95% out of the equation.

Maybe you glossed over the above? There isn't any such thing as a single that makes 61 HP at the wheel, it's called parasitic drag. Well, maybe a single on nitro methane can put 60 plus HP to the ground.





To the OP, 36 HP out of a single is very respectable, the weight of the KLR is the problem. A 610 Husky makes the same power, but it's rippin' fast because it's 100 pounds lighter.

Oki is a place no Marine will ever forget once they have been there. I did the advanced MSF course on the USMC klr and the dirt is school for the military on the KLR
Semper Fi

Only a person willing to do constant oil changes and valve checks would feel this way.

There are extremely few Euro bikes even in the same ball park as the KLR/DR/XR (not looking as speed, looking at purpose). That being said, the new 650 Terra from Husky is a sweet new entry into this exact market, and is claiming about 50 hp at the rear wheel.

They're claiming 58 HP at the crank on the re-badged BMW which is about 46 HP at the wheel.

Every dyno's different, but I got my #'s here:
http://www.motorcycle.com/manufacturer/2013-husqvarna-tr650-review-91450.html

"Compared to the G650’s 50 crankshaft horsepower at 6500 rpm, the TR650 cranks out a purported 58 ponies at 7250 rpm, a 16% improvement.... Our dyno testing of the BMW revealed 44.2 hp at 7200 rpm, so the TR should produce just over 50 horses at the wheel."

In either case, the numbers aren't bad at all, and the price point is good.

I think the primary reasoning behind the low power out of the KLR/DR/XR is that these bikes are at an extremely low price point, and all the R&D it would take to put a new, technologically advanced engine in one would price it out of the destined market.

Compression would be my guess. The thing is designed to be reliable and run on bad gas anywhere in the world. Oh yea, and be cheap.

Like they say, and engine can be powerful, reliable, and cheap. Any two of the three at the same time.

Yeah, I've read that. We don't get to measure HP at the crank like the mfg, so we get to estimate. Common correction factor for most dyno's is 20%, they give you back 20% after a dyno run...this is actually crank HP. So if we go off the claimed 58 BHP we get 46.2 HP at the wheel, it's extremely difficult to get 6 more HP out of any single and they are speculating...Husky mods for an extra 2 HP at the wheel is realistic.

If you haven't put in a KLX needle and leaner main jet, I recommend it. The KLR main jet has a lean spot just off idle that really screws driveability then they put in a too-rich main jet to compensate. http://www.schnitzracingstore.com/catalogs/catalog.asp?prodid=4929812

It's not an accelerator pump (or a larger piston), but it does improve off-idle response.

Speaking of KLX, the KLR650 needs that whole motor. It is a pretty strong runner. My 640 has flat out spanked every DR, XRL or KLR 650 I have ever ridden with. But my buddy's old KLX650 was almost as fast on acceleration then beat me on top end. At 90 mph on gravel I was glad to be on my 640 since the suspension and weight on the KLX650 are still in crap territory. But it has a pretty impressive motor. I have no idea why Kawasaki neutered it for the KLR650.

It's not just the anemic engine, it's the fucking atrocious suspension and dangerous brakes.

Intake valve closing in the most important valve event.
Close it early and low rpm torque is up but high rpm breathing/HP is limited.
Close it late and low rpm torque is down but high rpm HP figures go up.

With late closing, compression can be increase because effective c/r is low at low rpm.

With state of the art ECU, fuel & ignition timing can be such that a late closing intake can still have good low rpm grunt.

Which leads us to this:

Your numbers are a bit off. Some are crank figures and some are wheel figures. That said, some engines have WAY more volumetric efficiency than others.

The KLR likely has a lower compression ratio, worse flow (through the intake, head, and exhaust), a less-aggressive cam, longer stroke, poor spark placement, poor carbing, or more parasitic drag. It's also heavier than most.

I see a similar difference in power between my GF's Suzuki SX4 and a Honda Civic SI. Both are 2.0L, DOHC, 16V motors. The SX4 makes about 140-145HP at the crank and is a little over 2700lb. The Civic SI is rated for almost 200HP and is a few hundred lb lighter.

If you want to make power with a KLR, improve the flow (intake, head, and exhaust), bump up the compression, put in a more-aggressive cam, use a lighter piston, and dial in the carbing. Other than that, you could increase the displacement with a big-bore kit, and/or add forced induction (turbo) and/or nitrous. A kit exists to make 50+WHP with a WR250R/X, via turbo. Forced induction and/or nitrous can add crazy power. It can also obliterate your engine's internals and your driveline parts.

Forced induction is especially nice at high altitudes.

Google/youtube camshaft lobe centers. Muzzy has a long how to on it.

Advancing the intake closes the intake sooner=better bottom-end. Retarding later=better top-end. At best it is only about a 700rpm movement in the peak.
On DOHC engines with large valves at wide included angles, care must be exercised or the in. & ex. can tangle at overlap... I did it on a GS1000 Suzi.

Looks like the KLR cam gears are woodriff keyed to the cams. I've used offset keys on Chev small blocks.

Worn cam chains in proper tension retard the cam/s.

Yep, it does, but its a high strung crack head that od's a lot. The klr will just trudge on my after the ktm has shit the brick.

Sent from my ARCHOS 80G9 using Tapatalk 2

+100

This engine was built to run at lower speed for a long time with more usable, less intimidating power/torque delivery.