Check out this thread on ADVRider.com:

The more I read the more I'm thinking "fuel injection, definitely fuel injection."

It's one less thing to go wrong in the middle of nowhere.

Hoodbridge Costco.


Hmm, turn your computer upside down?

Ok, this is better...

Reminds me of when I took my old 240D to Colorado. Not only was it old and worn-out, on top of being one of the slowest cars in the world to begin with, but there was no way to adjust its fuel injection to compensate for the altitude. There were huge clouds of smoke coming from the tailpipe as I slowly creeped up and over each pass.

So yeah, modern injection (as opposed to carbs) would be a big help for the altitude changes. Good point.

But you're just trying to justify getting an F800GS as opposed to old KLR or DR, aren't you?!

Anyway, what does a KLR cost from Costco? The website doesn't say - you have to fill out a form.

I've been reading quite a bit of road reports and have looked at a bunch of video.I've got quite a bit more research to do before I make decision.

I've been reading in a few places that people don't believe the new KLR's are up to the task. The DR650 still seems to have a very strong following.

Really, it'll come down to a few questions:

1. do I want to ride back across country?

2. do I want to keep the bike after this trip?

3. what else would i use it for?

I have found myself thinking the F800GS would make an excellent guest bike and is sufficiently different from what I have that I /might/ actually use it to do different kinds of touring that are problematic on the K100RS. (Egads, I know, right?)

If I get a DRZ400, for instance, I could use it as a trainer bike. But it's small and the trip back cross country would be rough.

If I get the F800GS, then I could slap some street tires on it at the end of the trail and head up to Victoria for a bit with relative ease and come back across country through the badlands, which I've never seen.

Hmmm. Possibilities.

I was up at Bob's 30th Anniversary party last night. They had a late model .

I was surprised how crazy tall the bike was. I couldn't flat foot it which is saying something. I'm not sure if the suspension had been modified or not. It has a lot of plastic that I think will break easily in a fall. I have heard that the earlier models were more robust.

I took at a look at the F800GS. It was more of a beast than I was suspecting. It's wickedly popular so I'm not sure I'm going to find one used at a reasonable cost.

They also had a lowered 2002 F650GS Thumper with heated grips and ABS for $4800 or so, which they do not have listed on the website. It's definitely more street oriented but has the advantage that it's relatively cheap and it would make an excellent trainer bike for all except the shortest riders. It's large enough that it would make a usable second guest bike as well.

They also had a also with hard bags. Everything I dislike about the 2002 GS was not present on this bike. It's definitely more adventure oriented and so far "feels" the most right. It won't work as a trainer except for the relatively tall but I have a feeling I would enjoy the bike much more. It's low enough that I can flatfoot it but has enough suspension travel that I think I could do pretty challenging terrain in it. It's fuel injected, obviously. Big plus.

I'll go back up there this week or next and test ride all three bikes.

Maybe the 2002 is not such a good idea:

Hmmmm.
1

Much cheaper to let someone else buy all that stuff.

Sounds good to me.

I'm going to go up and take a look at it tomorrow. It's owned by a retired guy who coincidentally has been a long time Bob's customer.

He sent me some pics. The bike, while it has a fair amount of mileage, is set up the way I would want. I'm not sure I can deal with the older thumper style F650, the new twin being a much nicer bike, but we'll see.

(broken forks) Yikes. That's a disquieting possibility. I wonder if anyone's made reinforcement hardware, or aftermarket forks for this?

I'm going to guess that the bike may have been *way* overstressed. I've not seen figures recently, but I want to say that that mode of failure is pretty statistically rare.

Apparently, based on forum reports and a couple of articles, BMW beefed up the front forks in the 2003 model year. There are a number of reports of spontaneous failure of the forks in the earlier models, where "a number" means something like 7.

There'e speculation that there's a metallurgical problem in some examples of the earlier bikes. It's a very scary kind of failure.

Here's some reading for you (I'm liking the Tiger BTW):

BMW G650/KLR/v-strom shootout

Reviews of pretty much every adventure bike made:

Top ten used adventure bikes:

Top tes adventure bikes of 2010 (now good used deals):

Multi-year "best" winner, the Tiger 800:

Direct 2012 KLR vrs G650 comparo: 1

Excellent. Thanks!

I'm leaving in about 20 minutes to go up and look at a 2006 F650GS Adventure that's completely outfitted with all the Touratech gear, rear ohlins, updated front end, crash guards on everything, skid plates, center stand upgrade, super huge tank (claims 430 mile range), aluminum luggage cases, rack, comfy seat, tank bag, bunch of other accessories, single adult (retired) owner. From the photos the bike looks really clean. Mileage is a bit higher than I'd like at 55k and i'm not sure I can live with the thumper but on the flipside if it checks out it would be turn key and the asking price is fair.

Missed a really good one:

Ever have one of those moments upon arriving somewhere you know you're about to learn something unexpected?

I rolled up and before I had my helmet off the garage door opened to reveal a motorcyclists nirvana.

Rack of gear on the left. Aerostich Roadcrafter, well worn. Check.

Garage. Immaculately clean. Check.

Row of BMW Vintage and Adventure posters on the right. Check.

Vstrom with aluminum panniers. Check.

Newish FJR. Ok, a little weird, but check.

The 2006 F650GS Dakar I had come to see had been significantly undersold.

"Prepped and ready for around the world adventure." might have been a better description.

Strangely, talking to Ron about his travels, experiences and technical knowledge made me feel like a rank beginner. I mean, damn, this guy has done a lot and is so much more plugged into our motorcycling world than I ever have been.



The bike appeared prepped and turn key. It had a host of Touratech upgrades that had been extremely well thought out. Two integrated "spare" tanks, in blue, on each side, provided for a range of over 430 miles. Once the main tank runs to reserve you stop, flip a petcock, wait a few seconds and continue riding.

A carefully thought out tap allowed you to, through the secondary petcock to drain fuel into a camp stove.

It has a complete set of touratech guards including: handle bars, engine, under engine plate and kickstand plate. He also has the chainsprocket and chain guards.

Two large metal panniers were supported with a hefty mounting system. He pointed out that he had two spare levers wire tied to the mounts. "In case of an off". That theme repeated itself as he had various spares securely wire-tied including a spare axle nut and washer. "Changing a tire in the mud sucks if you lose that nut." he said with an air of 'been there, made that mistake.".

He had routed a spare clutch cable that sits unused next to the in-service one allowing for quick repairs if it breaks. He also had a spare throttle cable.

The footpegs and levers were also after market. He mentioned he had gone through much of the bike and had pre-emptively replaced the water pump impellor since they are known to go bad on that model.

He had redone the front with, I believe they were, Worx springs and the rear sported an Ohlins shock.

He also replaced the seat, added a rear rack and had a host of other upgrades too numerous to remember. Behind the bike sat a new set of 90/10 Michelin tires ready to mount.

"Wattage is a problem on these bikes. It has a 400 watt alternator and the bike uses 300 watts to run, so there's enough power left over to run the heated grips and a vest and that's about it" So he added a voltage meter that sits tastefully about the tachometer.

"Battery life is also a problem since it's in a hot location so it's now insulated, but regardless you should check it every few thousand miles."

All needed service had been done and it seemed to be in perfect condition.

We got to talking about the TAT and he sounds like he's pretty much done it all. If he hasn't, he's certainly done sections of it including Copper Canyon, if memory serves. He also offered, should I buy the bike, to take me through the most common kinds of repairs one might end up doing on the side of the road. "You should know the bike if you're doing to do a trip like that." he said and I agree.

I took the thing for a very short test ride. It's buzzy, as is to be expected from a thumper. It's also /TALL/. I mean wicked R1200GS Adventure tall. I was not able to flat foot the thing. It feels very big and a bit unwieldy. The bags are simply huge. "It's a truck." he said. But it is comfortable.

As I mentioned to him, I do not think that another bike that is as well set up for serious adventure riding will cross my path again.

But the height is really causing me pause. If I get this bike, it would be a single purpose machine and I wonder, not knowing, if it's "too much" for the purpose I am intending on using it for. As far as adventure riding goes, I'm a novice and I don't know if something like this might be too much.

Years ago I had an XL350 that I would take trail riding and it's from that perspective, right or wrong, that I'm coming at this from. I don't know what the technical sections of the TAT so I'm relying on my past experience to guide me. A shorter smaller bike would be easier to deal with on technical trails. But then he mentioned something.

He talked about the tires for a while and suggested getting more aggressive dual sport tires for the trip. "Deep mud is a problem. On these tires (the ones on there right now), you get into deep mud and you can just forget about it."

Deep mud. I hadn't thought about that. The videos I've seen have only shown modest creek crossings and the occasional puddle but deep mud or deep water can be a problem. Getting stuck would suck. Having that extra suspension and height would certainly help in those cases I would imagine. I guess it's a question of compromises. How much flat? How much technical? How much mud? How far from civilization? If it were an around the world trip I think this truck would be the right answer. Large enough to carry enough but small enough to be workable. So I told him that I have to think about it for a while ... what am I going to do with it once I get back? It can't be used as a trainer and it's too tall to use as a guest bike except for Bruce and Duncan.

Even if I don't buy the bike (Maybe one of you guys might want to look at it, it's impressive.) I hope he joins us here. He's incredibly knowledgeable and has been writing for Iron Butt Magazine and is more connected into the touring/sport/adventure BMW. He also mentioned a few rider courses geared at the "seriously advanced riders" which he has taken a number of times.

I wanted to do a comparison contrast so I headed over to Bob's and test rode three bikes theres: a 2009 F650GS, a 2012 F800GS and a 2008 KLR 650. The 2009 only had 1K miles on it, the KLR 3k.



This bike felt very much like my XL350 used to. It's much lower to the ground and lighter than the Dakar. It's not really an off-road bike, more suited to slightly more challenging dirt roads like the ones we typically ride. With it's cast wheels and shorter travel suspension, it would not be up for any kind of brutal off road duty but with some minor modifications and taking it easy it could probably make the trip. As Milner implied in a previous post, the engine sounds like a sewing machine but it's very quiet and smooth. The front brake reservoir gives me pause. It seems a bit fragile. The bike has the advantage that it would make a good guest bike and may even be able to do double duty as a trainer. Having the two cylinder motor and updated frame and suspension also feels like a big plus.

I did feel like I could do any of the trails I used to ride on this bike. Deep mud or water, not so sure. If I were to get a bike like this I would at the least have to add the engine guards and probably hand guards. The seat would also need to be replaced. There's no way I could do all those miles on that seat.

And it would obviously need different tires. The bags that come with this bike are probably adequate but would probably not survive an off. The asking prices of the 2006 is $5800. The asking price of the 2009 is $8700, but there's probably some room to negotiate.



The F800GS is really the "Adventure" version of the F650GS. Despite the nomenclature, the two bikes share the same motor. The F800 produces a bit more power, is much taller and is more geared towards more adventurous off-road riding. It has the same flaky brake reservoir. I found the F800 to be more stable on the road and more confident in corners. While you're on it, unlike the 2006 Dakar, you don't feel like you're on a tall bike until you go to put your foot down. It's quiet, powerful and confidence instilling. It "feels" like a higher end version of the 650 but I don't know if the upgrades are worth the significant price increase. At around $14K out the door without any of the extras I would need, like bags, it's well outside the range of what I would want to pay for. But it's an interesting data point.



Ok, I tried to have an open mind. I really did. I took it for a test ride. Carbs! Fuck I hate carbs. Manual choke. RPM's never did settle down to where they needed to be so I guess the carb needs a bit of adjustment. Again I hate carbs. The thing buzzes like nobody's business. Because of all that breakable plastic I did have a fair amount of wind protection. Unlike the F650GS I didn't really get the feeling that I could confidently do any real trail riding on this. It's really tall, but not as tall as the Dakar. I could just barely flat foot it. Everything felt really cheap like it would break easily in a fall. But it was really cheap, by comparison to BMW prices. I think the asking price is around $4800 or so. The bike is pretty powerful and I had it up to 80 and it felt stable. The buzzing would kill me. No heated grips so I was freezing a bit today, but that's not going to be an issue over the summer. It also would not make much of a good guest bike and definitely could not be used as a trainer.

They did have a 2001 F650GS thumper which I failed to try. It has the lowered seat and seems much more like a street bike than any of the others but I believe I saw one in one of the TAT articles I read. It would be a cheap option, assuming I could live with it for that long, and it would make an excellent trainer bike. It might just be a bit too far on the other end of the spectrum.

So, in a nutshell, I have much more to learn and I need to get a better sense of what the TAT entails. Can it be done on what amounts to a light duty offroad/trail bike or do we really need to go something much more dirt oriented? Is a real adventure bike too much? Too big? Too tall? Too heavy?

Here's a good thread on the transamtrail:

Interesting comparison of the bikes. Here are my disorganized thoughts:

You don't need to be able to flat-foot the bike. You'll get used to it.

You should probably do some short test trips before heading across the country.

Given the above, it would seem sensible to me to get something less expensive until you KNOW what you want/need. Like for your second TAT trip.

Got dinner on the stove, so that's it for now!

yea, I don't know about the flat footing it. I'm just concerned about being on a hill and having the thing start tipping on me. If it's lower it'll be easy to catch, I think.

There's no way I'm getting a new bike. It'll be a used something or other for exactly the reasons you mention. I do suspect this will be the only real offroad trip I do, but who knows? Maybe I'll get hooked.

Aw man, check out this TAT Music video. Colorado section, minutes 7 to 8.



Ok. I need to go see that. I have read on ADVRider that September is the best time to be there. Earlier the passes are likely not to be open ...

Yeah, I'd have to think about the flatfoot thing. It was pretty disquieting to try to sit in the HP2 at Bob's and have to tip toe it--not what I'm used to. I could only just flat foot a stock GS. Maybe thicker boot soles?

It sounds like maybe folks haven't spent much time on dirtbikes?? As someone else mentioned, the flatfoot thing really isn't a big deal once you get used ot it. You want the height and suspension travel when on real "off road" stuff. In looking at the TA videos it really comes into play in the deeply rutted, loose rock, gravel and water crossing. The deep ruts in loose rock is a big one though. It also comes into play going fast over rough terrain.

A couple of observations on the bike reviews: a strong street and comfort preference really came through, if at all possible you should test ride these things off road. The dynamics really are that different. On the KLR yes, it is cheap. But, many many many people have been hammering them around the world for 25 years. It probably feels "flimsy" to you compared to the street bikes your used to, but is actually capable of absoring a huge amount abuse, with very affordable repairs. Everything breaks, how easy and cheap is it to fix. Would you e comfortable with having a toothless stranger welding a bicycle water bottle onto the frame of your BMW? probably not. With the KLR or DR? Sure, why not...make it two and use one for a fuel bottle

There are a number of adventure and off-road riding classes out there that are like Total Control or CSB but for dirty riding. Might be worth looking into for people who have little experience off road.

Just some thoughts.

For racing and performance offroad riding I agree with you 100%.

I've got about 10 years and several thousand miles of dirt riding from "back in the day". Doing small hilly going over trees around tight corners and through mud riding at 5mph I found having a lower bike invaluable. Inevitably when the thing stops you want to be able to put both feet down to prevent it from falling over. I hate it when you get stuck in the mud or in a rut and you go to save the thing from falling over but your feet don't easily reach the ground. I can't remember how many times I've gone up a hill and lost speed then had the rear wheel lose traction and had the fool thing stop. If you can't get your feet on the ground, you fall over, hopefully not down hill or backwards.

The same for deep sand. Get into it deep enough and being able to flat foot walk the thing through helps tremendously.

Some of the sections of the trail, especially in the Rockies, appear quite technical and slow.

Combine that with so many ride reports saying they wish they had had a smaller bike.

As for the KLR, I think I would have to try an earlier model. I just can't see the 2008 being up to the task. I had ridden an earlier model in New Mexico and it made a much better impression on me than this late model one. Too plasticy and the feeling is it could break at the slightest tip over. Also, with elevations of 12,000+ that carb is going to be a real liability. Really it's the carburator that's causing me the most difficulty in accepting these bikes for this trip. If the KLR or the DR were fuel injected with oxygen sensors it'd be a much easier sell.

My feeling is you're imagining the bumpy rutted bits that a taller bike could more easily negotiate and I'm imagining more of the it's 2 feet of mud and we're pushing the bikes in a thunderstorm or trying to get them through some narrow spot flatfoot walking them.

Essentially, I'm thinking in the following context:

1. there will be long distances of fast Dalton Highway like firetrail. From what I've seen of the videos and photos, mileage-wise the majority of it could probably be done on my brick.

2. there will be sections that suck where we will likely be going to a walking pace. The crossings, the puddles, the deep sand, the mud, the places where you're spinning the real wheel slogging it through some muck. You really don't want to fall down at 2mph in muck. That just sucks.

3. there will be really slow technical sections that are akin to trail riding where you're near crawl speed. Deep pits where you stop, analyze, plan a path through.

4. there will be obstacles. Trees, fences, little bridges, and who knows what else

5. there will be bumpy rutted sections.

6. there will be road.

So the question is, which do we optimize for? Maybe I'm not thinking about this right, but I'd rather have an easier time when we're making next to no progress than to have a better time for most of it only to get really stuck in the bad parts.

I remember in Long Way Round, the little Russian two stroke street bike seemed to be able to handle the rough terrain much better than the big GS's.