Maybe, functionally, there are NO differences between radiator bypasses available.
Then . . . if considering a Thermo-Bob-like device, what are your own expectations? What consequences, pro and con, if any, do you expect from such a device?
I'll bet, at the operational level, either will stabilize coolant temperature more fully, and at a higher degree, than the OEM system. The actual "Thermo-Bob," as far as I know, has been designed and manufactured in the USA with transparency suggesting competent design and production, with extensive testing. Don't know much about the Procycle, other than the vendor seems an ethical business (from Internet reports). "Copy cat?" Generally, a device, "obvious to a journeyman craftsman skilled in the trade," (lots of radiator bypasses exist, over a wide range of liquid-cooled engines) cannot be protected by a patent [layman's (non-lawyers's) opinion].
Regardless, your own expectations and requirements remain key, IMHO.
No adding a thermobob won't correct a pre-existing bore problem. Again, here's a related post on the subject;Honestly I think the bore has a propensity to go out of round on the bottom end regardless......but the T bob may lessen the distortion to the extent that the rings can compensate. Cary theorized that after a number of heat cycles the bore tends to become relatively static - which is why it stays fairly stable after a 685 rebore job. The '08's and '09's have a well deserved reputation for oil burning due to the ring (re)design, not because the bores are way worse than earlier or later bikes.....this is based on my review of some of KLRCary's material as well as my discussions with Eaglemike. Cary described the bore distortion as a design issue. Mike's belief is that if you put an earlier or later piston/ring set into a virgin 2008 or 2009 bore that it would have no greater chance of being an oil burner than other years.
To recap my thoughts;
- early Gen2's ring design was poor leading to a much higher incidence of oil consumption; as the bores distorted the rings couldn't control the oil.
- KLR650's have a propensity for some degree of bore distortion due to the design (lack of support on the bottom end of the sleeve and the thickness of the sleeve)
- the bore shape tends to stay relatively static after a certain number of heat cycles which is why the 685 kits usually solve oil consumption issues (and Mike's rings seal better)
- Aftermarket sleeves such as the 705 sleeve are beefier and don't distort much, if at all.
- the Thermobob helps lessen bore distortion by greatly reducing the delta T of entering and leaving water (cold shocking the cylinder). It's logical, given Cary's thoughts on the heat cycle issue, that the benefit of the thermobob is much greater if it's installed when new or very early in the engine's life. That said, it can only help regardless of when it's installed (do no harm! )
....at least that's the synopsis I've come up with after some research and discussions with the guys that have the first hand knowledge and experience on the subject.
- 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.
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 .
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
According to their website it’s still a 180. In my experience this is still too low. Although I didn’t scientifically measure, I don’t perceive any difference in warmup time or operating temp since installation...same old wild swing. I’m glad to hear there is now a 195 stocker available.
I'll suggest that you should use the 195F Watt-man Thermo-Bob 2 thermostat in the ProCycle radiator By-pass assembly if possible.
Better yet, purchase the Watt-man Thermo-Bob 2 in the first place.
Well I'm glad I read to the end .I'm from Canada and was trying to get out of the extra charges for delivery from the States but I'm going to because that's my best option again thanks for the info
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Kawasaki KLR Forum
303.2K posts
27K members
Since 2006
A forum community dedicated to Kawasaki KLR 650 motorcycle owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, modifications, adjustments, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, conversions, and more!