2013 KTM Adventure 1190

Discussion in 'Ridiculous streetbikes with 6 CPUs and too much HP' started by goodcat8, Apr 23, 2012.

  1. bigdave-gs

    bigdave-gs Explorer

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Oddometer:
    2,717
    Location:
    Central Texas
    You don't necessarily need more cc's to have plenty of HP and with a long stroke and a heavy flywheel you would have the low end torque needed for an Adventure bike capable of off roading. With a good trellis frame made from light weight chromalloy tubing and a light 750 V-Twin FI engine I think it could be done.
  2. Strokizator

    Strokizator Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Oddometer:
    247
    Location:
    Cincinnapolis, Pennsyltucky
    Unfortunately, in the real world for every rider who can rock a 990 ADV there are at least 5 more who want to look like they can. IMO this explains why the other 1200's sell so well. KTM is in business to make money although I doubt they'll ever abandon their core riders. Put me down for a 750 ADV.
  3. Jaimoto

    Jaimoto Spaniard in Chile

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Oddometer:
    1,393
    Location:
    ViƱa del Mar, Chile
    Yes you can, but that bike won't be a KTM, or at least not the bike some of us expect. LC8 (and RC8) are short-stroke engines, they love to rev, and that's one of the reasons we own one.
    The LC8 engine puts an smile on our faces. On the other side, the Super Tenere 1200 engine (and XT660R and Tenere) is ... boring. More capable? maybe, but still boring.
    I think I'm the kind of guy that thinks is fast but I'm not. I may be slow, but my 990 makes me believe I'm an awesome rider, able to control the furious LC8 and just I love that feeling. I don't need to be the fastest guy out there, I'm happy thinking I'm fast.
    So...give me a 1090cc, 125 HP, same weight the current 990 has and I'll buy that bike.
  4. dirtyac

    dirtyac Ktooner

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Oddometer:
    36
    Location:
    Melrose,NY
    Sorry folks, 2013 990 Adventure carries on with few changes. Maybe displacement wishes will be addressed next year... We'll have to wait and see.
  5. MookieBlaylock

    MookieBlaylock Long timer

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Oddometer:
    2,582
    Location:
    IntheeaglewingpalaceoftheQueenChinee
    pretty much and rather than low 400 pound 750 that will be marginally more capable off road i will use my 300 pound 690 for tight trails as i never liked the 950 much on singletrack anyway
  6. DesertSurfer

    DesertSurfer Tail sprayin

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Oddometer:
    1,578
    Location:
    City of the Angels
    You can only be young for so long... then gravity really settles in. And nothing makes a person feel old faster then a "Heavy Weight".

    A lighter 750 Adventure will certainly extend the riding time for the mid centurians.

    You'll all know the feeling... one day.
  7. bigdave-gs

    bigdave-gs Explorer

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Oddometer:
    2,717
    Location:
    Central Texas
    I don't want a marginal 750, I want a very capable long suspension traval, bad ass engine 750 that carries more than 3 gallons of fuel, duel sport, KTM LC8 based engine around 90 hp, that weighs around 400 lbs dry. I don't like the 690 Enduro because it is cramped, not very good for long stretches of highway and only carries 3+ gallons of fuel. It's more of a street legal dirt bike. Bad ass off road, but too short ranged for serious street touring. I'm looking for the bike that is both and not heavy. Seem like the manufactures are building bigger and heavier machines that are far more street capable than a true 50/50 Adventure Dual Sport! I want comfort and off road abilty with the abilty to carry fuel. Just because it can carry 7+ gallons of gas, doesn't mean you have to keep it topped off for off road riding
  8. TheMuffinMan

    TheMuffinMan Forest Ranger Magnet

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Oddometer:
    6,553
    Location:
    Denver, USA
    So you want a 750cc adventure bike that puts out as much power as a 950 currently does, that is lighter by about 140 lbs, and has longer stock fuel range than a 950.

    Sounds a bit unrealistic to me, but maybe that's just me.
  9. bigdave-gs

    bigdave-gs Explorer

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Oddometer:
    2,717
    Location:
    Central Texas
    The 950 was carburated, 90 HP, and 407 lbs dry, and in 2007, so I don't think in todays technology with 1000 cc bikes easily making 180+ hp, that a 750 FI LC8 based engine wouldn't have any problem making 90 HP reliably. As far as weight, low 400 lb mark DRY wouldn't be that hard either. Hell man, the 2012 990 Adventure R is 456 lbs dry ! ! ! Doesn't seem to "unrealistic" to me.
  10. MookieBlaylock

    MookieBlaylock Long timer

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Oddometer:
    2,582
    Location:
    IntheeaglewingpalaceoftheQueenChinee
    I think it was 436 lbs dry,50 lbs lighter would be nice. They sold the se for a while but not a huge seller so an entirely new 750 platform might be a tough bussiness case but who knows
  11. Schannulleke

    Schannulleke Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Oddometer:
    210
    I have said it already and will keep saying it:

    If Highland could do it a decade ago, KTM should be able to do it too.

    Highland Outback 950 V2
    Power: 85.00 HP
    Torque: 103.00 Nm
    Front suspension: 280mm travel 50 mm WP, adjustable compression and rebound
    Rear suspension: 300mm travel WP, adjustable stiffness, compression and rebound
    Dry weight: 165.0 kg (363.8 pounds)
    Fuel capacity: 20.00 litres

    Tataaa, KTM just has to paint it orange and they are good to go.
  12. Beema Killa

    Beema Killa Beema Killa

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Oddometer:
    819
    Location:
    Calgary Canada
    I want a unicorn! And an unbelievably hot chick who isn't crazy and can cook. In all seriousness, that bike is TOTALLY DOABLE! 750cc's with 90ish HP, long travel with some range has gotta be around the corner no? Seems to me there could be a good sized market for it. Unicorns too.
  13. KTBen

    KTBen Barrrp!

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Oddometer:
    479
    Location:
    Pipers Flat, N.S.W. Australia
    I think I read somewhere that the 450 rally makes about 70hp
  14. DaBit

    DaBit Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Oddometer:
    345
    Location:
    Netherlands
    My SV650 Adventure build puts out around 65HP and weights 156kg/345lbs ready to ride with it's (16 liters / 4.2gal) fuel tank somewhat more than half filled.
    If I add a front fairing + bracketry (adds weight) and replace the (steel) fuel tank with a composite underseat tank (loses weight), the total weight won't change all that much.

    So yes, the bike pictured above would be very well doable for KTM. In fact, I wonder where all that extra weight of the LC8 Adventure compared to the LC4-640 Adventure comes from. Those two bikes are comparable in 'features' and the LC8 engine isn't that much heavier than the LC4-640 engine. I guess it just adds up; a little extra weight in the wheels to handle 100HP, a little extra weight in the swingarm to handle 100HP, a little extra weight in the frame for those 100HP, heavier chain and sprockets, and the list goes on.

    Which also means that I probably don't want 90-ish HP, but more somewhere around 65hp. Makes the chassis lighter; less material needed to put all those horses on the road. And less horses to feed means more miles per gallon, which saves weight too.
    65HP in such a light chassis is more than enough to be above the speed limit within seconds from standstill, it is enough to carry a pillion and still have fun on twisty and steep mountain roads, and 65 horses can get you into trouble real quick when going offroad.
  15. SixDays02

    SixDays02 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Oddometer:
    276
    Sounds like AfricaTwin. :lol3
  16. charlie264

    charlie264 Long timer

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Oddometer:
    8,620
    Location:
    Blighty
    [​IMG]

    Hydraulic tappets, dry sump, oil in the frame, oil cooler, twin spark quad coils, twin pulse coils separate from generator, shaft drive. Need I go on...I sold mine.WHY...WHY O WHY. :cry<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
    <o:p></o:p>
  17. jerdog53

    jerdog53 Crop Dusting Everywhere

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Oddometer:
    6,693
    Location:
    80122
    Because it only made 50hp...
  18. DaBit

    DaBit Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Oddometer:
    345
    Location:
    Netherlands
    You missed the part of my post where I talked about a LIGHT chassis? :lol3:
  19. charlie264

    charlie264 Long timer

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Oddometer:
    8,620
    Location:
    Blighty
    Actually it made 62hp and with RS cams made 88 bhp. Pipe and smoke it.
    This was all back in 83, wonder how good it would be now if evolved. Did I mention hydrolic tappets. :D
  20. bigdave-gs

    bigdave-gs Explorer

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Oddometer:
    2,717
    Location:
    Central Texas

    Exactly, 88 HP from a 1983 Carburated cluncker of a bike compared to bikes today. Trellis frame, fuel injection lighter stronger materials, better suspension, lighter better brakes, it could be done very easily. I don't think we need 1200+++++ cc's, coming up on 600lb pigs. I think we need the HP to be around 90 to 100, weight to be no more than 450lbs dry, comfortable seats, great suspension, enough fuel to make at least 200 miles on the road, good wind protection, real skid plates and crash bars, and extra lighting and panniers as an option.