Kawasaki KLR Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
HI all, I'm new to the site, and to KLR's, i'm thinking of buying a KLR, This one in particular:

i was in the shop a while back and made a passing glance over it, it has 24,000ks on it, but didn't pay too much attention to it, then saw it again online, though it doesn't show any information on it, year model ect.

My question is, how was the KLR changed over the years? this one appears to have a different healight and rear guard along with a few other changes compared to most other KLRs that i have seen, what is confusing me is that i have seen KLRs both older and newer than this one, which look basically the same as this:


I know one is the a model and one the c model, but i can't seem to find info on when the change took place, and what the changes were, can anyone enlighten me?

Thanks, Rick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
The BigCee site has a pretty good list of the differences...unfortunately, the KLR History site is 'A' model specific (I didn't see any 'C's over there...). The 'C' was only available in Europe, and in Canada for a few years.

Since I own a 'C', I can list what I've discovered and/or been told...

- same engine
- different forks (larger), with no air-assist
- twin-piston front brake.
- heavier by approx 37 lbs
- steel wheels
- some other things are different (i.e. skid plate, rear brake reservoir cover, etc)
- smaller gas tank
- handlebar-mounted fairing (turns with the wheel)
- preload-only adjustable rear shock, which is a pain to adjust
- no tachometer (I really dislike this...)
- no temp guage...just a warning light
- completely different rear subframe
- smaller plastic rack (rated to hold a whopping 6 lbs, I think...I had my father-in-law fab a steel replacement for my JCW trunk)
- different seat due to the different subframe and tank...it's narrower at the back, and has different angle at the front where it meets the tank.
- slightly different stock rear tire size (120/90-17 come stock, as opposed to the 130/80-17). A 130/80-17 fits fine, though. Stock tires were different, as well (Bridgestone Trailwing 'J' and 'L', which were made for the bike as far as I can tell).

As a daily commuter, it's great. I haven't taken it off-road yet (blasphemy, I know), so I can't comment on how it works in the dirt. If you want to add accessories to it, you might find it harder to find stuff.

I.e.
- Luggage racks, especially, are harder to find, or are discontinued. Metalmule used to make one, but they don't list it anymore (the picture on their 'A' model system list is a 'C' model, so you might have to send them a note to ask). Hepco & Becker also make a rack for the 'C'.
- larger gas tanks are no longer available. Acerbis used to make one, and searching E-Bay might be the only way to find one now.

I'm not sure what year that one is...maybe someone else will know. If you have any questions, just ask...if I can answer it, I will.

Good luck,
Dave C
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks for the responses, I think i might go for a test rde on the KLR and see what i think for myself, I'm a bit worried about how heavy it is, and it might not be quiet capable enough in the dirt for what i am after, the other option i was looking at is a dr650, but they seem to be a bit more expensive, and not quiet up to the job on the road, so i'll have to make a comprimise somewhere i guess. Anyway i'll repot back after i have ridden it. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
I've got a C model to and some other differences are:

Slightly less suspension travel (200mm rear and 220mm front if I recall)
More powerfull electrical out put (depends on year, 2000 and up where 23amps I think)
More clutch plates (better clutch)?
Higher gearing 15/42 vs. 15/43 (I'm now using 14/42 as the stock gearing was way to high for commuting or off road)

I use mine to commute to work with and do some off roading. I put an Acerbis 23.5L tank on mine along with TKC80 tires and an aftermarket skidplate for an A model. I really like it but did add a removeable aftermarket windshield for commuting. I've also added longer spring spacers in the forks and I'm about to install RL-1 raising links, I'm 320lbs so see needs a little more suspension.

The only thing I'm not really happy with about my C is that I only get about 38mpg around town but that could be due to my weight and the fact that the previous owner did some tunning. One of these days I might try to lean it up a little or something to get some better mileage but for now I live with it as it is still way better than my Land Rover gets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
headdamage said:
Slightly less suspension travel (200mm rear and 220mm front if I recall)
More powerfull electrical out put (depends on year, 2000 and up where 23amps I think)
More clutch plates (better clutch)?
Higher gearing 15/42 vs. 15/43 (I'm now using 14/42 as the stock gearing was way to high for commuting or off road)
I didn't know that, especially about the gearing. I don't find the stock gearing that bad for commuting, though. Your suspension numbers are bang on, according to my service manuals.

headdamage said:
The only thing I'm not really happy with about my C is that I only get about 38mpg around town but that could be due to my weight and the fact that the previous owner did some tunning.
Mine is stock, and I'm getting approx. 5L/100 km, which is about 47 mpg according to http://www.pege.org/fuel/convert.html. So, you might be able to squeeze some more mpg out of yours.

Dave C
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top