ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > Road warriors
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-26-2011, 07:31 AM   #61
zimm
KTM
 
zimm's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Annandale, VA
Oddometer: 155
In the process of getting an '11 990 SMT
__________________
2011 KTM 990 SMT

Gone: '89 Honda Hawk GT650, '98 Honda VTR1000F, 2007 BMW R1200S, 2008 Harley Night Rod Special, 2007 Yamaha FZ1, 2008 KTM 300XC-W(e), 2008 KTM 690 SMC
zimm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 01:53 PM   #62
Falcon4
Adventurer
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Oddometer: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by BikePilot View Post
First the motor sucks compared to most other sporting twins and second its asthetics are completely uninspired. Its beyond me why KTM can't even match the performance and economy of a 14 year old Suzuki twin, much less modern stuff 106hp and 30mpg from a liter twin? Sure even though the KTM motor doesn't match japanese stuff from the 1990s

For what its worth I've ridden a 116hp twin and a 138hp twin (same model bikes, different internal motor work) and people who say 106hp is enough and more is of no use are just plain silly ;) You can definitely enjoy that extra hp if you want to.
I don't want to defend KTM too much here as I would love to see better mpg with reg gas,
but to be more clear, isn't the Lc8 one of the lightest twins of it's sort?
would weight be a factor in having a little less hp?
also isn't the DL engine a version of your old TL engine?
Doesn't the Lc maker more Hp than it in the DL1000?
Could it be when they tune them for better torque, the hp suffers slightly?
thanks to anyone who can answer,
__________________
KTM Supermoto T
Falcon4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 02:24 PM   #63
ultrachrome
Poser
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: Madrona, Seattle, WA
Oddometer: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falcon4 View Post
Quote:
First the motor sucks compared to most other sporting twins and second its asthetics are completely uninspired. Its beyond me why KTM can't even match the performance and economy of a 14 year old Suzuki twin, much less modern stuff 106hp and 30mpg from a liter twin? Sure even though the KTM motor doesn't match japanese stuff from the 1990s
For what its worth I've ridden a 116hp twin and a 138hp twin (same model bikes, different internal motor work) and people who say 106hp is enough and more is of no use are just plain silly ;) You can definitely enjoy that extra hp if you want to.

I don't want to defend KTM too much here as I would love to see better mpg with reg gas,
but to be more clear, isn't the Lc8 one of the lightest twins of it's sort?
would weight be a factor in having a little less hp?
also isn't the DL engine a version of your old TL engine?
Doesn't the Lc maker more Hp than it in the DL1000?
Could it be when they tune them for better torque, the hp suffers slightly?
thanks to anyone who can answer,
I would wonder what impact changes in emissions standards has had but in any case the OP provides no criteria or describes the conditions for their mileage claims.

My SMT used for commuting 50/50 highway/surface street pulls in mid 30's ridden pretty aggressively with heavy congestion. I've only done two days of interstate riding on the bike so far and I achieved 43.5 MPG.

My '05 SV650S was consistently no better than 42 on the same commute, low 50's on the interstate and mid to upper 50's on slower state highways.

The SMT is not an aerodynamic bike so the same motor in a crotch rocket frame/fairing would likely get a bit more on the highway.
ultrachrome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 03:21 PM   #64
dougn
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Oddometer: 129
I average 39 mpg commuting on my SMT....well over 40 steady freeway 80 mph.
dougn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 03:44 PM   #65
julesmt
Adventurer
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Location: usually somewhere in Europe
Oddometer: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by BikePilot View Post
I really want to like the KTM - its nearly the ideal bike for me, but it has two issues that annoy me. First the motor sucks compared to most other sporting twins and second its asthetics are completely uninspired. Its beyond me why KTM can't even match the performance and economy of a 14 year old Suzuki twin, much less modern stuff 106hp and 30mpg from a liter twin? Is this 1995? A stripped down, no-nonsense version of the Multi (HyerStrada?) might suit me better, but I'm not crazy about fiddling with desmo valve adjustments. Sure even though the KTM motor doesn't match japanese stuff from the 1990s it'd still be fun to ride and a heck of a lot more entertaining than the even-firing german things, and you don't see too much of the bike when riding so I may end up with one yet. Fingers crossed that either the Duc will get a bit more stripped/focused or the KTM will get a major motor and aesthetic re-work sometime soon :)

For what its worth I've ridden a 116hp twin and a 138hp twin (same model bikes, different internal motor work) and people who say 106hp is enough and more is of no use are just plain silly ;) You can definitely enjoy that extra hp if you want to.
The biggest advantage of a LC8 compared to the jap twins or a ducati L twin is its size. It`s tiny and very light, thats the reason KTM is able to make such a good handling package.
julesmt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 03:53 PM   #66
julesmt
Adventurer
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Location: usually somewhere in Europe
Oddometer: 42


Like this. Bleu is the Honda VTR 1000 engine, green is Suzuki TL 1000 / Vstrom 1000
julesmt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 04:17 PM   #67
Falcon4
Adventurer
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Oddometer: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by julesmt View Post
The biggest advantage of a LC8 compared to the jap twins or a ducati L twin is its size. It`s tiny and very light, thats the reason KTM is able to make such a good handling package.
"Suzuki used the TL1000S engine to power the 2002 DL1000 V-Strom, an all new motorcycle for the time. Taking the best of all worlds, the new bike’s fuel-injection system feeding the 996cc V-twin motor was derived from the GSX-R series and brought a big contribution to the 98 hp at 7,500 rpm" -quoted from TopSpeed

So it looks like the Japs were not doing so much hp with that TL engine once the moved it into a proper adv bike.

Nice pics on the eng size comparisons.
I get about 44 mpg hwy cruising.
35-38 in town.
__________________
KTM Supermoto T

Falcon4 screwed with this post 10-26-2011 at 04:23 PM
Falcon4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 04:59 PM   #68
WAP
Weekday Warrior
 
WAP's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: the cut
Oddometer: 991
FWIW my SV1 (just about identical to the motor in the Vee 1) gets mpgs in the mid 30s commuting in medium-heavy traffic, and at best 44-45 mpg on the slab. Also for comparison, the specsheet on my sv is 120 hp / 75 ft-lbs @ 437 lbs dry, compared to 116hp / 72 ft-lbs @ 421 lbs on the ktm. I haven't been able to ride the smt yet, so I can't give first-hand feedback on what the numbers actually translate to. Anyone have experience with both bikes?
__________________
2002 GS500
2007 SV1S For Sale!
2013 990 SMT
WAP is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 05:02 PM   #69
Falcon4
Adventurer
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Oddometer: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by WAP View Post
FWIW my SV1 (just about identical to the motor in the Vee 1) gets mpgs in the mid 30s commuting in medium-heavy traffic, and at best 44-45 mpg on the slab. Also for comparison, the specsheet on my sv is 120 hp / 75 ft-lbs @ 437 lbs dry, compared to 116hp / 72 ft-lbs @ 421 lbs on the ktm. I haven't been able to ride the smt yet, so I can't give first-hand feedback on what the numbers actually translate to. Anyone have experience with both bikes?
Also KTM is known to under promise/ over deliver,
and the avg Lc8 coming off the line is more in the 125hp range I've read.
__________________
KTM Supermoto T
Falcon4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 05:19 PM   #70
Desmofan
Studly Adventurer
 
Desmofan's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Oddometer: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by WAP View Post
FWIW my SV1 (just about identical to the motor in the Vee 1) gets mpgs in the mid 30s commuting in medium-heavy traffic, and at best 44-45 mpg on the slab. Also for comparison, the specsheet on my sv is 120 hp / 75 ft-lbs @ 437 lbs dry, compared to 116hp / 72 ft-lbs @ 421 lbs on the ktm. I haven't been able to ride the smt yet, so I can't give first-hand feedback on what the numbers actually translate to. Anyone have experience with both bikes?
Yes: I have a 2010 SMT (bone stock except for a 2011 FI map load), and a riding bud has a SV1000 with pipes and power commander. He cannot pull me in a drag race..until triple digits where his better aerodynamics wins.
__________________
KTM990 SMT
BMW R1200 GSW
DRZ400S
Desmofan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 06:24 PM   #71
Ultra54
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Ultra54's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario , Canada
Oddometer: 149
I love the lc 8 motor and i get over 40 mpg easily. The way the bike handles is really what impressed me the most. I've ridden/owned several bikes in the last decade, the last being a Ducati m1100s and the KTM is leagues ahead of all of them.
Ultra54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 10:18 PM   #72
JJGeo
Gnarly Adventurer
 
JJGeo's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: Sunny Seattle
Oddometer: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultra54 View Post
I love the lc 8 motor and i get over 40 mpg easily. The way the bike handles is really what impressed me the most.
+1 The handling is what makes the SMT amazing.
__________________
'03 Yamaha R6
'06 Ducati 749S - DEAD
WMRRA #98
JJGeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 11:28 PM   #73
Pantah
Patriot Nation?
 
Pantah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: India Wharf
Oddometer: 10,103
I don't think the two bikes compete. The KTM is much cheaper and simpler. Interestingly, I think KTM twins were inspired by Ducati trellis fame twins. I have both, but they are not similar to ride.

The Ducs have much more torque for plonking around. My KTM twin is revvy, noisey and has a much better clutch/tranny. But my KTM is old. I rode a 2010 SMT and found it the sweetest riding motorcycle I have ever ridden! Hard to believe it is made by the same company as my old 950A.

I want one!

Meanwhile, the Duc is probably the finest of the two, but it's too much money and all that plastic styling really rubs. I would never ride something with a snorkle like that! Totally useless, too.

I vote SMT
__________________
Straight ahead and faster -Bo Weaver 1970
"There I was..." -Griffin Niner Three Hotel
"One day closer to a parade..." Jonny Gomes, spring training 2013
Pantah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2011, 12:13 AM   #74
capriccio
Beastly Adventurer
 
capriccio's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Oddometer: 2,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by apessino View Post
No idea - 158 seems completely ridiculous though.

In any case, the SMT and MTS use the same Bosch 9+ ABS system (as do my Ducatis and both of my BMWs, and a whole lot of other bikes). Maybe there was specific software problems in the first batch of MTS from Ducati?
You must have realized by now that this thread started as a comparo but turned into praise KTM and shit on Ducati.
Bottom line IS: The MTS1200 is twice the bike at one plus one half the price, but if they can only spring for the KTM then they must convince themself by convincing others that their choice is the better one, how else can they go on living. I especially loved the comment about the Termignoni tax which KTM does NOT have. Really? The bike with one third more horsepower needs a Termignoni tax? And the KTM doesn't? I suppose Ducatis need the Ohlins tax too. What crack of shit. About this, the SMT is great bike at a good price, BUT if you want more power and Ohlins step up to the MTS. I also loved the comment about the SMT having better suspension than the MTS standard which rides on top shelf Marzocchi fork. The crock is full.
__________________
Treat others as you would your loved ones and respect your loved ones as you would others.

Capriccio.

capriccio screwed with this post 10-27-2011 at 12:20 AM
capriccio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2011, 12:18 AM   #75
orv
Busted butt
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: CO
Oddometer: 442
One of the more complelling reasons for trying a Ducati that no one has mentioned is that the major service interval has been raised to 15,000 mi. For most riders, this would be once per year or less, which wipes out the trepidation of buying a bike that could end up being an expensive "hangar" queen, as some earlier Ducs were.

For those of us who think price is at least a consideration, the 2012 Ninja 1000 falls amazingly well into this category. Now with ABS, nice looking bags, and a sweet motor that hauls, its a great bargain.
orv is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 09:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014