Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Thumpers' started by grunkster, Sep 11, 2012.
my bad. way too many beers while posting.
i need to watch out doing that & step back.
Big difference between the 2011 TE630 and a new Terra?
There is a 2011 TE630 for $5799 with 215 miles on it at a local dealer compared to the new Terra price?
If anyone is interested in the TE630 its here in Jersey
I agree, I was kinda excited about the terra at first, but once I read the specs and saw the 408lb weight, I realized it was just another heavy beemer disguised as a husky dual sport :huh
Except for KTM it appears, everybody else seems to be making their dual sports heavier and heavier. I think they're heading away from the "dual" in dual sport......maybe they should start calling them "street-sports"
I don't have shares in husky, but this is not a KTM. It's not as light, it's missing a few ponies and its not as good in the trails.
But what it is, 33% cheaper priced, smother motor, more comfortable seat and probably a better range. It's no rally bike.
This bike is virtually the same curb weight as KLR. Looks like Husky has its sights on Kawasaki and not KTM.
I agree. I have a plated Beta 400RR and Kawasaki Versys. The Beta is basically a street legal dirt bike and will handle gnarly single track with the best of them but it's not good on the asphalt. The Versys is great on the asphalt and I have done a lot of long distance touring on it travelling 500 to 700 miles in a day but it sucks when the pavement ends. I was hoping the Versy would be at least adequate on gravel roads but it's not so I'm gonna trade it in on a Terra because I want a bike that is competent on the asphalt and still be able to handle off road duties up to two track jeep trails, and I think the Terra will be ideal for that. If you pay attention to what the bike was actually designed to do (be as good on and off pavement as it can be) it looks like Husky pretty much got it right. Of course the Terra is too heavy to be a good dirt bike, but the weight that works against you on the trails makes the bike stable on the asphalt and contributes to it being a good hwy bike. All those people who are critical of the Terra because it's not ideal for the dirt are overlooking the fact that the bikes they favor are inferior to it when it comes to riding on the hwy. It just depends what you want, and if you want a bike that you can ride a couple of hundred miles of asphalt and a hundred miles of FSRs in a day then I think it'd be hard to find a bike better than the Terra, and I'm really looking forward to finding out first hand.
Good points guys....I guess I was just hoping it would be more dirt oriented, being a husky and all. One thing I will say is I think its going to be a great bike for its purpose
Hey! Where did you get yours? I'm waiting for one to show up in Montrose......let me know how you are still liking it!
Got it from the dealer in Montrose. It was the first one they got in. It was only there for a couple days. They say they ordered six in all.
I have only dabbled around the neighborhood since after the snow. It looks like it will snow again this weekend too. i may sneak it out again if there are some dry spots.
It does neighborhood dabbling just fine!!
This sucks? :huh WTF?
All true, but I suppose if we are after a 80/20% road/dirt bike, we should just buy the Strada. That's what I don't quite get. The 16Xkg is ok if it means it can carry a load, but I can't get past the sub-200mm travel. Given we have the Strada for road performance, I think the Terra should at least match the KLR's travel. Hopefully for Mark 2?..
Haven't ridden a Terra yet but that was my guess. BUT on paper that engine looks like the right stuff meaning a WHOLE LOTTA mods could make it a decent adv machine. Or pop the engine into a (modded) XChallenge. Or, heck, just get, as you say, an "outdated XR or DR."
What bugs me is that I'm starting to get old - I don't want to have to lift up a 400+ lb bike when I'm out alone and just had a get-off out in nowhere land (perhaps injured). Right now my ride is a WR250R, which has a good suspension (shock modified) good range (aftermarket tank) and weighs in at about 300 lbs wet. It is good on the road and the trail - full confidence in that bike handling-wise - but it's under 30 hp. I would love a 45 HP version to be able to pass on the hiway, roost up some hill, have a bit more fun, etc.
Why are you telling me this, you ask? Because even though the WR250R is fairly heavy, most of the weight is well thought out...heavier brake rotors than the off-road version, a heavy-duty sub-frame yet aluminum hubs and wheels that are shared with the off-road bikes, aluminum USD's that are virtually the same as the off-road bike, a hybrid aluminum-steel frame, aluminum swingarm, alum brake pedal, etc.
Now dammit, why didn't the Husky use some aluminum too? I bet this bike could have dropped 30 or more lbs using $50 worth of aluminum.
There is no good reason that this bike wouldn't have worked for a broader spectrum of riders with a little more design effort - for little additional cost.
I'm not bashing the bike, I'm just frustrated with the industry - but maybe riders like me aren't of sufficient quantity to matter.:huh
edit: The thing is; the WR does work well-off road - yet is reliable, holds a lot of oil, has a fan, 15K mile valve adjustments etc... It CAN be done!
Get this: a 1996 KLX650 dual sport has an advertised dry weight of 319 +/- and a wet weight of 353 lbs. We are going backwards!!<TABLE style="WIDTH: 440px" class=mbike_datas><TBODY><TR><TD class=mbike_property_title></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent></TD></TR><TR><TD class=mbike_property_indent></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent></TD></TR><TR><TD class=mbike_property_indent_end></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent_end></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE style="WIDTH: 440px" class=mbike_datas><TBODY><TR><TD class=mbike_property_title></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent></TD></TR><TR><TD class=mbike_property_indent></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent></TD></TR><TR><TD class=mbike_property_indent_end></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent_end></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE style="WIDTH: 440px" class=mbike_datas><TBODY><TR><TD class=mbike_property_title></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent></TD></TR><TR><TD class=mbike_property_indent></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent></TD></TR><TR><TD class=mbike_property_indent_end></TD><TD class=mbike_detail_indent_end></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Kawasaki 2013 KLR650 Front 7.9" Rear 7.3"
Husqvarna 2013 TR650 Front 7.5" Rear 7.5"
Does anyone know just how accurate these mfg. specs are?
Why not shop for aTE630 then?
dont know about that, 690 is one smooth motor especially mid/high rpm
Exactly, he wants a 610/630 but in a new Terra, not gonna happen
I agree that the Strada is an 80/20% road/dirt bike but I think the point of the Terra is that it is a 65/35% road/dirt bike and Husky hopes that it will successfully compete with the KLR in dual sport sales - and I think it will. It's 22 pounds lighter than the 2013 KLR and has comparable suspension travel; the KLR has 0.4 inches more travel in the forks but 0.2 inches less at the rear. These figures are close enough that the determining factors as to which works best are the bikes weight and how well the suspension components work. The Terra is 22 pounds lighter and I think it probably has better quality suspension, so I'd give the nod to the Terra in this category. As far as hwy riding is concerned, the Terra has drastically more HP than the KLR and the reports so far are that it is very smooth and capable on the asphalt, so once you're back on the pavement I think the Terra will be significantly better than the KLR. I have a couple of friends, very experienced riders, who routinely ride their KLRs over B single track trails. I think the Terra will do just as well on these trails as a KLR but I think you'd have more difficulty trying to ride them on a Strada and for that reason I'm opting for the Terra.
As far as suspension goes when comparing a KLR and a Terra keep in mind how soft a KLR's suspension is. When you mount a KLR, you loose a lot of the travel right away. On the Terra, it sags maybe a half inch when mounted. The Terra has considerably stiffer suspension and is more usable in aggressive situations. I've ridden KLR's and my new Terra blows it out of the water in all categories. Especially engine performance. I sold my 650 V-Strom to get the Terra and I'm convinced it's faster than my Strom was.
Today is glorious day. There are three things on eBay for the Terra.
1: Boost box for $150 bucks
2: a brochure for $8
3: and a new bike for $6999
I know what I'm getting for item 2 and 3. The question is what am I getting for 1?
5% more fuel is supposed to equate to a HP increase.
I want to see actual dyno graphs before I shell out 150 clams.
Am I out of line here?.
Husky should have just stuffed the Beemer contrived engine into this chassis. Everything would have been perfect.. well except the price for the new package.. What a waste of a great bike that just may have benefited from the Beemer thump.