the justification would be increase kawi's share of the market by taking away from bmw and triumphs sales with a klr powered by an engine that is closer in performance.
and an FI thumper would prolly be justified by meeting upcoming stricter emissions standards. Think FI ninja 250 and Klx250 in europe.
You do not address PRICE POINT
As to capturing market share from BMW and Triumph, with all due respect to the KLR's many charms, even with a new fuel-injected engine, don't think the KLR measures up to the European competition in suspension and performance.
At what price would a BMW/Triumph/Husky/etc. customer be indifferent to those marques for a souped-up KLR, still "less than" the European bikes in performance, fit and finish?
No threat to carbureted engines so far; leastwise, not the DEATH PENALTY.
I could be terribly wrong; Kawasaki in my opinion will dance with who brung 'em; 20-plus years of standard production, tooling/fixtures/jigs amortization, and . . . a profitable niche in the market with goal share and profitability, and a killer price-point advantage; lost to greater or lesser degree with re-engineing and fuel injection adapataion.
Economics don't justify the upgrade (no corresponding net gain); capitalization of the initiative especially risky with the Tsunami crisis and economic downturn woes.
That said, I HOPE I'm wrong!