Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Road Warriors' started by ncj01, Aug 13, 2015.
Just needs a pop up headlight
Wow! I just read Alan Cathcart's article in CycleNews - really impressive initial review. As moto-journalists go, I have always found him to be a straight shooter and insightful about the finer details.
Also the definition is shifting towards FJ9's and Versys's(Versi?).
Hey KTM where is my supersport?! waiting for a huge answer to the S1000RR and R1
KTM claim road going sport bike are too dangerous for the road, nevermind the 180hp naked bike it's perfectly safe and sensible.
Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk
From the pictures I'm finding the area between the cornering lights and the headlight very odd looking. The 1290 Adventure cornering lights seem integrated into the front end design better.
Not a whole lot to complain about except the looks. I believe all of the technology on the GT has already been tested on the 1290 Adventure, so no worries about first year model purchase for the GT. Lower and lighter than the 1290 Adventure, this has to be a much sweeter ride on the asphalt. And the engine is reported to have less vibration? The price should be cheaper too. I have high hopes for this bike.
I used the pseudo cramped riding position of the 1290 SD to justify buying a S1000XR to sit beside it - I don't imagine a lower seat will do any favors for the long distance comfort of this bike. But I'm willing/hoping to be convinced otherwise!
33.1" for the S1000XR vs 32.9" for the SDGT.
They are both an inch too low.
The 1290 Adventure has adustable seat height, guessing not a feature of the SDGT?
That is the digital camo that makes protos hard see lines/shapes/etc with digital style cameras. Same concept of new military camo when it comes to sat photos. It would work better if someone didn't park the bike and allow people to take stills of it...
Good to see KTM as enough faith that their buyers can do 2nd grade math. More fuel means a heavier wet weight yet manufacturers are still putting smaller tanks on to lower the weight of the bike.
I have the tall seat on the S1000XR - roughly +1 inch. With lower foot pegs and maybe a bar change, it should be perfect.
I have my rearsets up almost an inch, with the PP seat and found that just right.
I also have lower rise bars
But then I'm all torso and arms, competitively short on the legs.
If that thing can really go 300 miles at 75mph with luggage, I'm in.
It somehow looks like the cockpit is cramped. It may stifle long legged riders like myself...
I doubt it'll be 300, but 250 270 isn't out of the realm. Like I said I've gotten 200 with an SDR.....on fumes when I found gas
Well, looking at average fuel mileage reports on fuelly.com for the 1290 SDR (not many of them), the SDRGT should be getting around 30 to 40mpg. So with the 6 gallon tank (23 liters=6.075 US gallons), it's looking at a theoretical range of 182 to 243 miles to the tank. With the right fueling, mods and riding style, 40/41 mpg should be obtainable. All speculation at this point tho.
Funny, I'm the same. But i got super spoiled by the supermoto position of my 690 SMC, and that's what I'm always looking for. I'm probably gonna drop both the bars and the pegs on the S1000XR to make things a little better.
I'm getting 45ish commuting in the bay area on my 1290. I've seen over 50 on long trips where I kept it around 65. I would expect the SDRGT should be able to push about the same mileage, putting you at almost 300 miles if you're interstate droning. FWIW, my SD ranged from 26mpg (track use), to around 35 (slow commuting with lots of lane splitting) to 45 (faster commuting, average of around 50mph), to 52-55 (accelerate slowly on to freeway, hold at 65mph, no faster).
I'd rather go bonkers and have to refuel more frequently...
Totally. I bought my XR because it felt like a waste getting 45mpg on the SD. But it's nice to have the range when you're touring!
My SDR gets.41-42mpg ar 80mph 2-up thats measuring gas. I have seen the dash pass 50mpg putting along at 40mpg in 3rd