Kawasaki KLR Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello,

I am new here, but not to KLRs.
I had a 98 once upon a time.

My question is, is ther a difference between the 12 and the 13 KLR 650?

My thoughts are going to a dealer and looking for a 12 when the 13s come out, maybe get a good deal?

Unless the 13 has something that the 12 does not?

Thanks for and and all info/opinions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks for the reply...

What do you mean by DOO issues?
I have done some reading, I understand that the oil gets burned when too many RPMs?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
389 Posts
Welcome, Seems the only changes for the 2013's is paint and graphics. The Doohickey (Balancer chain tensioner) has a decent lever since 08, the spring is suspect for long term use (spring they use seems a little long), but should not be a issue for several thousand miles. Did my 09 at 3000 miles and spring had a small amount of tension left. The oil burning seem to be an issue of sustained running at 5000 rpm and above. Get either one, break it in properly, check oil regularly and have fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
The DOO is the ballancer adjuster devise and is a much stronger unit than the earlier models for sure, but as stated above the spring is the big problem now.......for some stupid reason Kawi put a spring in that allows for 1 mayber 2 adjustments of the DOO and then the spring has zero adjustment tension left. This not good as it can then sooner or later slip off the post holding it in place and cause iisues. Even if it's just the fact that when you loosen the DOO adjuster bolt the ballancer system now can freely move back to an even looser state which will possible allow the chain to skip a tooth and or bind up which is a very serious situation and will cost you large. The DOO and newly designed Torsion spring from Eagle Mike is far suprior from the stock parts and should never loose it's tension. It isn't that expensive and the two need to be used as a pair, you can't use the stock DOO and the torsion spring as the stock DOO is timed differently on the DOO idler shaft. BUT, you can use a slightly shorter normal spring a get the tension back. BUT, beware not tyo put too much tension on the system or it will wear prematurely, again another problem.
Hope this helps:13:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,928 Posts
...

you can't use the stock DOO and the torsion spring as the stock DOO is timed differently on the DOO idler shaft...

Uh what? They looked identical to me when I changed out mine. The Eagle Mike doo was machined better but all the slots were in the same location. What does timing have to do with a chain tensioner?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,544 Posts
Uh what? They looked identical to me when I changed out mine. The Eagle Mike doo was machined better but all the slots were in the same location. What does timing have to do with a chain tensioner?
+ 1.

Doohickey (Idler Shaft Lever) only holds balancer chain TENSION; TIMING is of no consequence to the doohickey, AFAIK.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,252 Posts
I believe Willys is correct, but has chosen the wrong words.

The balancer lever has no impact on the timing of the balancer system, of course. That is, no effect on the phasing of the relationship of the counter weights to the piston at top dead center.

There is, if I recall correctly, a difference in clocking of the shaft slot to the arced slot between the EM doo and the Kawi doo. The EM doo has the arced slot clocked a fair amount counter clockwise as compared to the Kawi doo.

My belief is that the theory behind this is that the Kawi doo will run out of adjustment after a while, thus the EM doo has the clocking change to allow for a longer period of adjustment. That's just my opinion of the theory; the truth may be that it was easier to machine that way.

Some see that as a benefit; I see it as a false benefit. I would suspect that Kawi, when they designed the OEM part, figured that when the adjustment lever ran out of travel that it was time to refresh the balancer system parts. Were one to use up all of the EM doo's adjustment, the chain in that system would be worn well beyond its practical service limit.

In that event, of course, the timing of the balancer system would have changed.:)

And, I have never heard of a Kawi doo running out of adjustment range. Spring yes, doo no.



T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
I believe Willys is correct, but has chosen the wrong words.

The balancer lever has no impact on the timing of the balancer system, of course. That is, no effect on the phasing of the relationship of the counter weights to the piston at top dead center.

There is, if I recall correctly, a difference in clocking of the shaft slot to the arced slot between the EM doo and the Kawi doo. The EM doo has the arced slot clocked a fair amount counter clockwise as compared to the Kawi doo.

My belief is that the theory behind this is that the Kawi doo will run out of adjustment after a while, thus the EM doo has the clocking change to allow for a longer period of adjustment. That's just my opinion of the theory; the truth may be that it was easier to machine that way.

Some see that as a benefit; I see it as a false benefit. I would suspect that Kawi, when they designed the OEM part, figured that when the adjustment lever ran out of travel that it was time to refresh the balancer system parts. Were one to use up all of the EM doo's adjustment, the chain in that system would be worn well beyond its practical service limit.

In that event, of course, the timing of the balancer system would have changed.:)

And, I have never heard of a Kawi doo running out of adjustment range. Spring yes, doo no.



T
Okay I read this twice and now have to chuckle:):):). You think that kawis spring is the only problem yet there doohickies are known to break and cause injury etc... I dont understand why you think that Kawi got the Doo correct even though they break... Yet you dont think that Eagle-Mike had thought out the amount of wear the stock balancing chain can stretch???

Maybe you have never heard of a kawi doo runing out of adjustment range because it breaks prior to it runnin out of range because spring is way too long... Or before the spring runs out of travel the owner is smart and replaces the original with an EM doo...:stickpoke:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
389 Posts
I believe reports of lever breakage on 08 and up are virtually nill, because of the redesign. The springs seem to be the weak point, not allowing many adjustments before spring tension is gone. I think most just change lever while in there for piece of mind from disasters on Gen1's which had bad levers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
My local dealer here tells me color and decals are the only tangible difference.

The yellow and black option sure looks cool but I already bought in at the 09 level so I'm committed for awhile.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,252 Posts
Okay I read this twice and now have to chuckle:):):). You think that kawis spring is the only problem yet there doohickies are known to break and cause injury etc... I dont understand why you think that Kawi got the Doo correct even though they break... Yet you dont think that Eagle-Mike had thought out the amount of wear the stock balancing chain can stretch???

Maybe you have never heard of a kawi doo runing out of adjustment range because it breaks prior to it runnin out of range because spring is way too long... Or before the spring runs out of travel the owner is smart and replaces the original with an EM doo...:stickpoke:
Bug -

We're talking design here, not quality of manufacture. The topic is the clocking of the arced slot with respect to the shaft, not the breakage rate of the OEM part nor the stupendous lack of quality that Kawi put in several different designs before getting anywhere near right.

What I put forth was clearly stated as my opinion. If you can't tolerate the opinion of others I can understand that. A bit of a pity, but I understand. At least try to refrain from putting words in others' mouths.

And yes, I'm sure that Mike can do the math on how much more stretch is allowed in the chain with his design. Were it my design I would not have gone over what the OEM design allowed. Remember, even his current doo design predates his torsion spring. With that, another concern I would have had would be whether or not a tension spring could take up that much slack without initially being too tight. From a clocking perspective I would have left well enough alone. That's just my opinion....

Further no where did I say in the above post, nor have I ever said, that I think the Kawi design of the past was right. Even the current design is sloppier than it should be. That is just my opinion.

I've always argued that, even on the Gen2, replacing the stock balancer lever with an EM lever and spring (I prefer the torsion spring) is a wise choice. The OEM lever will work, but the spring will not work for long. Once you're in far enough to replace the spring, you might as well do the doo. Again, just my opinion.

And maybe, just maybe, I've never heard of a Kawi lever running out of adjustment because none ever has. They don't all break, you know. I have an opinion about why many of them do break, but it would probably be upsetting to some to hear it.

T
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,252 Posts
Oh dear.

Here goes.

If you examine failed levers, either in-hand or in pictures, you'll note that the most common failure seems to be a break in the heat-affected zone of the weld on the older designs. That is likely due to vibration of the eccentric's shaft in the too-sloppy slot. With the new part being and investment cast part that mode of failure should be behind us, even though the fit is still sloppy.

Both the welded-up part and the stamped part were none too robust in the area of the arced slot. The metal was quite thin. I'm sure that from a strength of materials standpoint the Kawi engineers thought it robust enough for it's intended purpose when the adjustment bolt was tightened properly. Empirically, they found that not to be the case, and it only took them a handful of tries and 20 years.

However, working at tech days on doo replacements, holding failed parts in hand, and looking at pictures of failed parts, I believe a fair number of failures are due to simple over tightening of the adjustment bolt. Since the part was not overly robust this causes marring, scoring and deformation which give rise to stress risers and fractures.

The torque spec on the bolt is very light - it only needs to be a bit snug. Simply put, over-tightening can cause failures of the OEM part, in my opinion. The torque spec is in the neighborhood of 6 ft-lb, or 70 in-pounds. I've cracked off bolts that I swear were tightened '3/8" drive GRUNT!' level.

I'm in no way trying to deflect blame from Kawi for an overall crappy effort, but ham-fisted mechanics (be they factory, dealer, or shade tree) contribute to quite a fair number of failures.

T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I have a 2013 Yellow and Black. I was unfortunate enough to break off the right mirror. I then bought a 2012 replacement. They are different! The 2012 has black hardware while the 2013 has chrome. The 2012 is bigger and I am having trouble mounting it. I think I will have to see if I can rotate the throttle housing a little to give some room for the nut.

damn.

I think the 2012 version looks better.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top