Kawasaki KLR Forum banner

1 - 20 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So I just got done watching a video by Psycho Cruza about the new 2018 KLX 250.

KLX 250S has been gone since 2015.
New 2018 model has Fuel injection.

This makes me wonder... is there a possibility of a 3rd Gen KLR 650 (or some variant, like a KLX 650) with fuel injection?
I know a lot of people here like their carbs, and I totally understand, but I think fuel injection would bring KLR power up while improving economy. I know there is room for improvement.

-nb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
389 Posts
IMHO, Fuel Injection might not be such a bad thing here in the US. Not sure if taking it into third (or second) world countries would be such a wise idea though. Between fuel quality and repair/replacement parts availability . . . . ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
895 Posts
I bought a brand new KLX250S for my wife once. I think it was a 2010. Those bikes are so lean from the factory it wouldn't hardly every start. She hated it and so did I.

I don't think they'll change the KLR until emissions requirements force a change or you guys quit buying them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,652 Posts
From an emissions stand point, it might be easier for Kawasaki to bring back the KLX650 engine and fit fuel injection to it.
The narrower included angle of the valves and the more modern port design made a more compact, efficient combustion chamber. (Think Ninja design.)
The "R" model or dirt only engine was a very strong running engine 1993-1996.

They might need to change the crankcase to dry sump design like a XR650L Honda to reduce engine height. The old KLX650 engine was so much taller that Kawasaki choose to use a perimeter frame to go around the cylinder head instead of over it. But that reduced fuel tank capacity, which the American buyers Hated!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
I bought a brand new KLX250S for my wife once. I think it was a 2010. Those bikes are so lean from the factory it wouldn't hardly every start. She hated it and so did I.

I don't think they'll change the KLR until emissions requirements force a change or you guys quit buying them.
Before I had my first bike, I really wanted a KLX250 supermoto, but I too test drove a 2010 250S and I also thought it ran really poor. I test drove a 2011 WR250R and I thought that thing had some snap to it, especially for a 250.
I think the thing is someone will/does have a tune or a computer flash for the KLX250S. They probably only have it lean JUST to pass emissions.
I know Harley's had to do that for some of their bikes because the factory had them run extremely lean off the assembly line just so they could pass emissions. They then offered a factory tune to make the engine run the way it was supposed, but had to name it something else for legal reasons.

That being said, I think if we could gain an extra bump in power while keeping emissions at the same level they're at now, fuel-injection would be awesome on these bikes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
I agree, EFI would be great. As mentioned above, HD sold their very bikes lean. We offered a factory "race only" tune which changed the timing and fuel curve. Then adding a high flow exhaust and air cleaner made them much more rideable. Kawasaki could do the same thing and make money on the bike and the tune.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,652 Posts
And Harley Davidson paid an EPA fine earlier this year for their 'dirty computer' or 'race tuning' which wound up on the streets and highways.
Of course that 'fine' didn't even equal the profit margin of the part or service, un-like VW's TDI Clean Diesel.
The EPA could have attempted to balanced the national debt, if they had any Real enforcement power.

Read the 1st few pages of a Kawasaki OEM Service Manual and probably any brand manual.
Also printed into the Kawasaki Owners Handbook, just ahead of the maintenance schedule. Of course the Owners Handbooks do not have the potential fines published in it. And I have no idea of why not!

Here is my interpretation.
Up to $10,000 for the person that installs the noisy exhaust, on a street legal vehicle.
Up to $10,000 for the person that modifies the jetting or EFI to work with the noisy exhaust, on a street legal vehicle.
Up to $10,000 for the person that uses the modified vehicle on the public streets and highways, instead of on a closed course race track.

I think the dealer trade magazines reported a number which divided out to less than $40 per modified HD motorcycle. Which imo amounts to protectionism of a USA owned company, while sort of appearing to appease the green environmentalists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,553 Posts
EFI for KLR?

Cut to, "Fantasy Island" (TV show) opening credits; script: "Look, Boss! Da plane! Da Plane!"

The flying boat brings new guests to Fantasy Island; one or more whose fantasy is, EFI for the KLR.

My prediction: Kawasaki will exploit the amortized jigs, fixtures, inventory, etc., of KLR production to the bitter end, an exploitation that does NOT include the capitalization expense of adding EFI to a product now delivering satisfactory market share and profitability as-built.

Don't get me wrong; I wish my prediction to be in error. Yet, . . . money makes the world go round. Don't think it would be economically responsible to the stockholders, the widows and orphans with their life savings in Kawasaki Heavy Industries, to guild the KLR with EFI.

YMMV! :)

One final comment: IMHO, EFI ain't that big a "thang." No more power is available from optimum air/fuel ratio, whether delivered by EFI or by carburetor. On that score, the Keihin CVK40 comes close. Yeah, yeah, altitude compensation and contextual starting improvement with EFI; advantages significant enough to convince the green-eyeshade boys (financial decision-makers) to ante up the R & D, manufacturing and logistics expenses for EFI? What do YOU think?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,911 Posts
My understanding from what I've heard (Paul?) is that the current KLR650 is "grandfathered" by the EPA and that any major changes would result in them having to recertify the bike.....which would force a complete redesign effectively killing the bike as we know it. I thought that "grandfathering" ran out in 2018....

My prediction is that the KLR650 will be BNG's only until a complete redesign which may mean a different badge completely (KLX, Versys 650X, etc. ) ....but even if they call whatever they build a KLR....it will have zero in common with the current bike. ....just my speculation.


Dave
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,262 Posts
I have heard the same thing, yet can find no basis in fact for that rumor. "In 2019 the KLR will be dead and go to its grave clutching the CVK40 to its chest, never to be seen again and we'll all be riding the new 300".

Motorcycles are currently under the EPA ruling for Tier II with two important dates; model year 2006 and model year 2010+. Emissions were tightened in 2010, which may have been what brought on catalytic converters.

I have read, quite extensively, the documentation at the EPA site, particularly the final rule making for Tier II and the comments on proposed rule making for Tier III. Tier II clearly states what the emissions requirements are for motorcycles and covers the model years (that we are interested in for this discussion) 2010 and up.

Reading the proposed Tier III and comments, I find nothing for motorcycles other than an investigation of their contribution to sulfur emissions (0%) and the use and effects of E15 (it's bad for motorcycles and small engines not designed for it). Nothing about any proposed change in the allowable emissions.

My takeaway is that motorcycles are currently allowed the Tier II level of emissions from MY 2010 to infinity. Manufacturers are allowed to average their emissions across the stable and, given the size of Kawasaki's stable, the KLR isn't dragging the corporate emissions limits down.

To me that means that the KLR will continue inits present form with no changes other than BNG until such time as Kawasaki decides to kill it off. Given that they can sell every one they make, the tooling is fully depreciated, and that its entry into the Kawasaki accounting books probably falls under the heading of "Cash Cow", that will probably mean it stays as-is for the foreseeable future.

As usual, I reserve the right to be wrong.

All of this could change if there are revisions to Tier III (look to California to drive that), or whatever supersedes Tier III. It is notable that allowable motorcycle emissions are some 20X that of any four-wheel vehicle and that, per mile, motorcycles are quite, um, filthy. California does crazy crap with respect to emissions. You can't even buy a decent gas can here anymore.

If someone has something concrete on this 'grandfather clause' I'd love to see it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,911 Posts
thanks Tom and in case I wasn't clear enough in my first post, I have zero credible information on the emmissions thing, just repeating a rumor that keeps coming up for the purpose of determining if others have heard it too and/or how credible it may be.

.....I'm hoping the KLR (in it's current form, more or less) continues for some time. As imperfect as it is, it is a relative bargain and a great budget "mini-ADV"/ true dual purpose bike. The trend for new bikes seems to be going in one of two completely opposite directions; either big, expensive, heavy, powerful twin cyl. ADV bikes or dirtbikes with licence plates......neither are suitable for me.


cheers,
Dave
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,262 Posts
I agree. Even with its known shortcomings, it's a great platform to build on.

I am heartened, too, by Kawasaki's improvements to suspension and seating on the latest models. I have not had a chance to ride one, but I hear the improvements are good. Kawasaki didn't have to do that, but they did.

And we have to face the fact that a major facelift to the KLR with much better suspension, a modern engine, EFI, etc., probably wouldn't pencil out for them financially. We'll look for minor improvements as time goes by and BNG.

Especially BNG. Stickers and paint are cheap.

I think any major face lift would result in a $10K bike and likely a new model number. Given the slight change in mission from Gen 1 to Gen 2 towards road-worthiness and following that trend, it might be a K-Vs-R650 parallel twin ;^).

Who wants that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DPelletier

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,553 Posts
"Grandfathering" an EXISTING product, not in compliance with ex post facto latter-day regulations, seems logically credible.

Grandfathering the new manufacture of a product not in compliance with current regulations, not so much, IMHO. Yet, Kawasaki may enjoy some sort of license to manufacture carbureted KLR650s to the end of time, despite current emission regulations.

FULL DISCLOSURE: My comments totally speculative; I have no earthly idea how emissions codes are administered/enforced at the manufacturing level.

As to EFI for KLR650s, I wait for the excited announcement of the arrival of, "da plane," from a short man in a white linen suit, before my hopes are raised.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Re the EFI and KLX250 - Kawasaki's had EFI KLX250's around for a while in other markets (thailand, UK, etc. I think pretty much the world other than north america, can't remember about Mexico) called the DTracker. So, EFI isn't new to the KLX, just new to the KLX in North America. So, this means that it's not 'new', which is a good thing - meaning it's already gone through it's growing pains, although it may be tuned differently in North America, which could cause some issues at first - until they get the tuning sorted out, AND mean the EPA requirements.

Re the KLR and EFI - I'd heard the same thing that it was grandfathered and once they made any significant engine changes, they'd lose the grandfather clause and have to recertify. I think there's a youtube video by EveRide ADV titled "The death of dual sports" or similar that talks about this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,553 Posts
Just for discussion:

On a multi-week ride, through remote, rural, thinly-populated, "third world" venues (e.g., Gobi Desert, etc.), would you prefer a carbureted (even a CVK40ed) motorcycle, or a fuel-injected one? Why?

DISCLAIMER: The question is broad, perhaps overly simplistic, and non-specific as to TYPE of fuel injection, interdependency on associated systems (like fuel pump, computer processor, fuel quality available, etc.). Set the stage in your answer with assumptions affecting your conclusion.

Assume limited-to-none convenient availability of spare and repair parts on the ride.

Anyone?

:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,911 Posts
Just for discussion:

On a multi-week ride, through remote, rural, thinly-populated, "third world" venues (e.g., Gobi Desert, etc.), would you prefer a carbureted (even a CVK40ed) motorcycle, or a fuel-injected one? Why?

DISCLAIMER: The question is broad, perhaps overly simplistic, and non-specific as to TYPE of fuel injection, interdependency on associated systems (like fuel pump, computer processor, fuel quality available, etc.). Set the stage in your answer with assumptions affecting your conclusion.

Assume limited-to-none convenient availability of spare and repair parts on the ride.

Anyone?

:)
Oh what the heck;

I ride what I would chose; a Gen1 KLR with a carburetor, no computer, no ABS, low compression so as to run on crappy gas and the ability to run without a functioning battery. Simple as can be and a plethora of parts available (compared to most other bikes)

The fuel injection itself is probably relatively simple and reliable.....it's all the computers, batteries and other crap that make it more likely to fail.....no, wait, not necessarily more likely to fail but less likely that you could fix it/band aid it in the event of a failure.



Dave
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,262 Posts
What Dave said.

Having had my RT just quit at 70mph on Route 60 near Brenda, Arizona with no way to do anything about it, I'll take the security blanket of stuff that obeys the laws of physics over sparks running though refined sand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
I agree, based on ease of repair and availability of repair items in remote locations a simpler bike would be best. There's really no replacement for the simplicity of the basics.
In the world of social media these days there are tons of people that are taking 50,000 mile trips on bikes to remote locations and posting it online for all of us to enjoy. I follow a lot of people on Instagram that are typically riding the GS1200 and GS800 and they don't seem to have many issues..... but they could be taking very good care of their bikes.... or possibly a testament to reliability. Either way when you are out in a remote location would you rather be riding GS1200 that could have ABS fail like in the Long Way Round documentary and not have any way of fixing it or be riding the supremely reliable KLR...... I'll take the KLR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,553 Posts
Regardless of our wise analysis and postulating purposes for motorcycles . . . the green eyeshade guys (financial "suits") will support the manufacture of motorcycles they think provides adequate profit and targeted market share. So far, for over a quarter of a century, KLR650s have fulfilled the criteria of Kawasaki Heavy Industries management.

In this scenario, if it ain't broke (and KLR650 marketing ain't broke), chances are no one is going to fix it, IMHO. YMMV!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Just for discussion:

On a multi-week ride, through remote, rural, thinly-populated, "third world" venues (e.g., Gobi Desert, etc.), would you prefer a carbureted (even a CVK40ed) motorcycle, or a fuel-injected one? Why?

DISCLAIMER: The question is broad, perhaps overly simplistic, and non-specific as to TYPE of fuel injection, interdependency on associated systems (like fuel pump, computer processor, fuel quality available, etc.). Set the stage in your answer with assumptions affecting your conclusion.

Assume limited-to-none convenient availability of spare and repair parts on the ride.

Anyone?

:)
I would prefer fuel injection. I had three carbureted bikes before my current FI BMW. In 11 years and 70,000 miles I have had zero issues with the fuel injection. It sits all winter and fires up within two seconds in the spring. My prior carbureted bikes (Kawasaki KZ100, KH400 and ZG1200) all had carb issues at one point or another, usually due to stale gas. And this was all before E10! It would be much worse now. Give me fuel injection any day.

I will add that my car experience has been similar. Every carbureted car I owned had carb issues at some point. I have yet to have an issue with any of the dozen or so FI cars and trucks I have owned other than a couple of TPS sensors, but they were easily replaced. They just always start and then run and run.
 
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
Top