Thermobob - Page 2 - Kawasaki KLR 650 Forum
1987 to 2007 Wrenching & Mods For maintaining, repair or modifications of Generation 1 KLR's. 2007 and earlier.

 3Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 30 Old 10-07-2019, 10:00 AM
4th Gear
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Posts: 2,344
As far as the OP's question;

- the only differences APPEAR to be that the Procycle kit gives you hoses and a rad cap for the additional $80.00. Bills part looks a little different, the bypass T looks like a nicer part and h gives you a spare T stat. I personally wouldn't want the hoses and the stock hoses are holding up well on my 2000 and 2001 but to each thier own. The Thermobob is proven to be a high quality kit, the Procycle one may or may not be.

regardless of all the above, I question the "in house designed" claim by Procycle and would buy the Thermobob out of general principle 'cause I don't like people ripping off other peoples designs.

2 cents,
Dave
vfrkent likes this.
DPelletier is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 30 Old 10-07-2019, 10:24 AM
4th Gear
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Posts: 2,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damocles View Post
Does the lack of a Thermo-Bob distort engine cylinder bores? On ALL KLR650s running without radiator bypasses? If so, in the service life of KLR650s, early installation of Thermo-Bobs appear critical, if the ovalization is not corrected by the device.

If a radiator bypass only PREVENTS cylinder bore distortion, I'd wonder whether any non-Thermo-Bobbed engine has a symmetrical cylinder bore; if the bore geometry remains true without a bypass, I'd wonder why. Don't know if the vendor claims avoidance of cylinder bore distortion from use of the product, or offers any test data to that effect.

Just for the record, I think evidence suggests incorrect piston/ring design and/or construction was responsible for the excessive oil consumption of the circa 2008 model KLR650s, not the absence of Thermo-Bobs. What evidence? Fewer instances of excessive oil consumption reported after re-design of pistons and rings by Kawasaki, say, on circa 2009 and later models. My opinion only; YMMV!


1) it isn't the lack of a Thermbob that causes bore distortion, rather installing one may lessen it

2) nothing except a boring machine will correct an oval bore

3) No the vendor doesn't claim anything, nor will you find any evidence to support or dispel the concept; as discussed many times, this does not and will not exist. The physics either makes sense to you or it doesn't.

4) yes the ring redesign lessens oil consumption, see my previous post for thoughts on why.


People take potshots on the Thermobob all the time; frankly I couldn't care less if people want to use one or not. After carefully reviewing all the data available and talking to several people I consider subject matter experts, I was convinced (and still am) that it is a good addition to the KLR which can only have a positive effect. I don't think that every KLR without one will become an excessive oil burner, nor to I think adding one guarantees that your bike won't develop an oil burning issue......I DO think it is LESS LIKELY with the T bob and there is no way to measure or quantify this belief. Gen2's benefit more than Gen1's due to the larger rad and early Gen2's benefit more than later Gen2's due to the poor ring design's tentative ability to properly seal the bore, particularly if it is distorted to some degree. These are MY thoughts only


Dave
DPelletier is online now  
post #13 of 30 Old 10-08-2019, 09:13 AM
5th Gear
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,332
Good points, Dave!

The THEORY (a Thermo-Bob reduces/inhibits/minimizes cylinder bore distortion) appears plausible; may be entirely valid. Yet, as you mention . . . corroborative data supporting the theory remains elusive. Anecdotes ("point estimates") may exist; the phenomenon may be universal. Availability of a statistically significant sample seems unlikely, to me.

That said, "Stands to reason," on the premise of positive Thermo-Bob implication regarding cylinder bore integrity, may be positive incentive (along with other factors) for Thermo-Bob installation .
DPelletier likes this.

“You better put down that gun. You got two ways to go, put it down or use it. Even if you tie me, you’re gonna be dead.” "John Russell" (Paul Newman), Hombre
Damocles is online now  
 
post #14 of 30 Old 10-09-2019, 06:42 PM
1st Gear
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: La Honda, CA 94020
Posts: 22
Send a message via Skype™ to seldredg
I have a Thermo-Bob, installed when bike was fairly new. I've never noticed a difference in where the temperature arrow resides after warmup and while riding, after installation compared to before. Should I have?
seldredg is offline  
post #15 of 30 Old 10-09-2019, 09:24 PM
4th Gear
 
GoMotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,250
We have drifter away a bit from the original post, but I will point out that when my first 2008 started burning oil at a quart per thousand miles, I viewed it as self changing the oil. All I had to do was add oil as needed and change the filter every few thousand miles.
GoMotor is offline  
post #16 of 30 Old 10-09-2019, 09:47 PM
Neutral
 
dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 10
The T-bob and the ProCycle units are significantly different as the T-bob thermostat hangs in an enclosure on the hose but the ProCycle mounts in an extended housing where the stocker goes. ProCycle includes a 180 deg thermostat.
dallas is offline  
post #17 of 30 Old 10-09-2019, 10:33 PM
Neutral
 
dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 10
After further review...I see that the T-bob 2 is similar to the ProCycle version I purchase in March 2015. If the T-2 would have been available back then I would have purchased it instead.
dallas is offline  
post #18 of 30 Old 10-10-2019, 08:27 AM
5th Gear
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by dallas View Post
After further review...I see that the T-bob 2 is similar to the ProCycle version I purchase in March 2015. If the T-2 would have been available back then I would have purchased it instead.
Just curious, dallas (I basically favor a, "free market"), what factor(s) influenced your preference for T-2 over ProCycle?

“You better put down that gun. You got two ways to go, put it down or use it. Even if you tie me, you’re gonna be dead.” "John Russell" (Paul Newman), Hombre
Damocles is online now  
post #19 of 30 Old 10-10-2019, 08:58 AM
Neutral
 
dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 10
The T2 wasn’t available yet and I liked the mounting arrangement of the ProCycle version better. T1 was a blob hanging in the rad hose
DPelletier likes this.
dallas is offline  
post #20 of 30 Old 10-10-2019, 09:15 AM
Neutral
 
dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 10
The T2 wasn’t available yet and I liked the mounting arrangement of the ProCycle version better. T1 was a blob hanging in the rad hose. Since I first read about the Thermobob here on this forum I would have preferred to follow your lead.
dallas is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Kawasaki KLR 650 Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome