Klx250s or XR650L

[maxrates]

I know.....I am beating a very Dead Horse....but.....

I want to get back into the dual sport world. I have owned a KLR650 and before that a honda xr250. I sold the xr to get something street legal...then sold the KLR to get a pure street bike.....sold the ST1100 now have none.

I trailer the bike about 100 miles to east texas and ride there. The KLR was fun but a little heavy at times in mud and deep east texas sandy roads. The XR was a blast but not street legal. (never had it on the hiway)

I am very tempted to get the new KLX250s. (hey johnny i read your review). But for some reason I am afraid that on the paved roads that the little 250 would be too lacking in power.

I have my eye on a used xr650L for sale in Houston. I know it would be plenty of power but is it actually going to be as much fun on the dirt roads?

Let me tell you how I ride.:::  I ride the back roads and explore. I take as many dirt roads as I can find but spend much of the rides on black-top out of necessity. I dont race, do jumps, or any type of Motor cross type trails.

I am told that the xrL is better off road than the KLR and it sure feels like it by just sitting on it.....but it is still a 300# plus bike.

Also would the honda air cooled enging be less maint.?  Does the KLX require more valve adj. etc. ???

Some one HELP.   Man i wish i could ride one. It is terrible to pay thousands for a bike that you cant even test ride first.

Thanks for the therapy ...

Doug

[Johnny Monsoon]

The KLX250S and X bike are about the same, power to weight wise.  The KLX is better on road than the XL.  They both have about the same top end.  The KLX handily stomps the XL offroad.  The KLX can be bumped up to a RELIABLE 331cc, which means it'll surpass the XL in power to weight, which also means it could be regeard to be better on-road at highway speeds.  Below highway speeds this bike is as good as any other bike.

If you'd have been interested in the KLX and the DR650, I could have seen where you were going for tour-ability vs. dirt-ability.  However, the XL vs the KLX seems like a no-brainer to me.  The KLX seems to whoop the crud out of the XL everywhere except in the 'being red' department (which has nothing at all to do with reliablity).

[maxrates]

Thanks Johnny.........

Clarify your response for me. .... Are you saying that the KLX250s is better on the hiway that the XR650L ?   And that the power to weight ratio is better on the KLX250s ?

I am 6' 210.  Would the KLX250s "stock" carry me on the black-top in a decent way?  I doubt that I would want to go with the "big bore" kit.

Thanks again.

[maxrates]

Another  thought:

I will be loading the bike in my truck.  A 650 is a load to get in and out of the back of a truck.......

[garry]

I think Johnnys math is questionable on power to weight. Put a 200 pound rider on each one (the real world) you have  the following using claimed dry weight and "uncorked" rear wheel HP (pipe, jetting):

KLX: (262 + 200) = 462 with 22 HP = 21.1 pounds per HP (rear wheel HP per Two Bros Racing dyno chart)

XRL: (324 + 200) = 524 with 38 HP = 13.8 pounds per HP (per ThumperTalk threads)

[R.Markus]

Man i wish i could ride one. It is terrible to pay thousands for a bike that you cant even test ride first.

If you lived closer to northern Indiana you could test our KLX.

The KLX we have tops out at around 72 MPH. The PO put a 5.1-18 tire on the rear (a lot bigger than stock), which I think is why. I like the little bike a lot and it handles a LOT better in tighter trails than my 640 (duh). The 250 is down on power a little bit, but like I said, I am used to the KTM.

The real deal breaker, as I see it, would be whether the riding area you use is a lot of fast dirt/gravel (XL) or a lot of tighter technical trails (KLX). The KLX is easy to pick up (don't ask me how I know, or tell Krismark that I know this  ), where as the XL, while lighter than my KTM by some margin (and is a huge pain to pick up repeatedly), will still be a pain.

[Johnny Monsoon]

I think Johnnys math is questionable on power to weight. Put a 200 pound rider on each one (the real world) you have  the following using claimed dry weight and "uncorked" rear wheel HP (pipe, jetting):

KLX: (262 + 200) = 462 with 22 HP = 21.1 pounds per HP (rear wheel HP per Two Bros Racing dyno chart)

XRL: (324 + 200) = 524 with 38 HP = 13.8 pounds per HP (per ThumperTalk threads)

The numbers I've found don't put the XL anywhere near 38hp, and it is 50lb heavier than the KLX.  However, the XR is a different animal entirely, but is not street legal.

Check my power:weight thread; the information was documented on my spreadsheet, and I can look the sources back up, but I believe it was TwoBros that I used as one of the three sources for each.  Also note that the bb kit on the KLX bumps the power up to the high 20s.

Also, rider weight is irrelevent when measuring power:weight.

However, to answer your question I have seen my bud who is 6'4" and 240+lb cruise around 80 with no problem.  Much more and he's wringing its neck.  His is stock.  A 331 kit (which is factory Kawasaki, and if you have them do the work, will keep your warranty) will let you get to the end of your rev range and increase the top speed (even though this isn't any DS's strong suit).  It'll do highway just fine in stock trim, but you have to ride defensively; like you'd drive.  Around town it'll be quicker than most cars and far more agile.

Oh, and yes, the KLX is better on any roadway than the XL is.

[garry]

The numbers I've found don't put the XL anywhere near 38hp, and it is 50lb heavier than the KLX.  However, the XR is a different animal entirely, but is not street legal.

Dude, your research/numbers are bogus. A stock XR650L, yes the street legal one, puts out 31-33 HP on a dyno. Rear wheel, not crank. Put an exhaust pipe on it and re-do the jetting and people regularly get 38-40 at the rear wheel. Here's the link showing a stock 2003 XR650L making 31 HP at the rear wheel.

http://photos.motorcycle-usa.com/bmw_vs_xr_dyno_5_23_03.JPG


And here's another one from a guy's personal bike showing stock vs pipe/jet:

http://www.pm-04.com/graphics/other/xrl_dyno.jpg

[garry]

Also, rider weight is irrelevent when measuring power:weight.

Wrong again. The bike has to pull the rider around so it's VERY significant when considering how much acceleration a bike has. And the lighter the bike, the more significant it is. Consider a 100 pound moped making 5 HP. That's a 20 pounds/HP ratio, similar to a KLX. Add a 200 pound rider. You now have 300 pounds per 5 HP, a ratio of 60:1. Huge change. Compare a 300 pound bruiser on a 125 versus a 150 pound teenager. Who is going to win the drag race? The teenager. Rider weight matters in the real world. The greater the percentage of rider weight in the total weight of bike+rider, the more important it is. That's why it doesn't matter much to car whether you have one or two adults in it. It accelerates about the same because a 200 pound difference isn't that big a percentage on a 3500 pound car.

[maxrates]

The numbers I've found don't put the XL anywhere near 38hp, and it is 50lb heavier than the KLX.  However, the XR is a different animal entirely, but is not street legal.


Oh, and yes, the KLX is better on any roadway than the XL is.

Let me clarify a bit:   I am comparing a 2006 Kawasaki KLX250s.....to a 2004 Honda XR650L.  

The XR650L is the street legal version from Honda.

Is the KLX250s really better on the street than the XR650L ?

[Albie]

Also, rider weight is irrelevent when measuring power:weight.

I don't know how you figure this, as it is VERY relevant. The rider weight HAS to be added to the bike to determine true power to weight ratio's. The dang bike isn't riding around on its own.  

[GetFuzzy]

I don't know how you figure this, as it is VERY relevant. The rider weight HAS to be added to the bike to determine true power to weight ratio's. The dang bike isn't riding around on its own.  

While rider weight does figure into overall performance the power to weight ratio is strictly the bike's horsepower divided by it's weight. A rider's weight isn't included because guess what not everybody weighs the same. It is just a way to compare a bikes performance to another.

[Johnny Monsoon]

Wrong again. The bike has to pull the rider around so it's VERY significant when considering how much acceleration a bike has. And the lighter the bike, the more significant it is. Consider a 100 pound moped making 5 HP. That's a 20 pounds/HP ratio, similar to a KLX. Add a 200 pound rider. You now have 300 pounds per 5 HP, a ratio of 60:1. Huge change. Compare a 300 pound bruiser on a 125 versus a 150 pound teenager. Who is going to win the drag race? The teenager. Rider weight matters in the real world. The greater the percentage of rider weight in the total weight of bike+rider, the more important it is. That's why it doesn't matter much to car whether you have one or two adults in it. It accelerates about the same because a 200 pound difference isn't that big a percentage on a 3500 pound car.

No, no no no.  The rider will be weight on either bike. To mark the engine performance at each machine, you omit any extranious weight.

Add 300lb to either, and you'll affect the weight proportionally to each measurement.  Engines don't become weaker with more weight; they remain constant.  If they put out X power at X weight, they will always match that ratio.

[Johnny Monsoon]

Let me clarify a bit:   I am comparing a 2006 Kawasaki KLX250s.....to a 2004 Honda XR650L.  

The XR650L is the street legal version from Honda.

Is the KLX250s really better on the street than the XR650L ?

Again, yes.  Not only is the KLX better on the street in every way, but is also better in the dirt.  It also does NOT suffer by any stretch when spun up against an XL.  While the others here will have you believe that power:weight must include rider because of some magical difference in rider density or some other nonsense, the fact remains that the bike will be geared for maximum leverage near its maximum power, and the KLX finds it as often as the XL, which means they operate near steady-state in their effective powerbands.  These aren't bikes with one speed; the gear ratios were chosen carefully to have a lot of overlap and make use of each engine's capabilities.  That's why rider weight has nothing to do with anything.  

Haven't you seen a 50cc scooter drag around a 250lb guy?  They can do this becasue of the effective gearing and keeping the bike's 50cc's at max power over a given speed range.  

You will not have any trouble getting the bike to legal speeds, quickly, with the KLX.  It also has a smoother engine (by far) and a better saddle (by far).  It is not the bike to be loaded down with gear and luggage though; if you want a bike to do that with, the larger 650 machines would be better options (DR/KLR).  I'd opt for a DRz400 well before the XL.

[R.Markus]

"What bike should I get?"



"Hey, them's fightin' words!"

[Johnny Monsoon]

"What bike should I get?"



"Hey, them's fightin' words!"

 

[maxrates]

Mayby folks are just too caught up with "big cc" bikes.

One says the 250 is a dog.............another calls it amazing !

Maybe....like you said.....at "posted" speeds a 250 would do fine.

Others talk about doing 90 mph on their KLX250...and my thought is ": who in their right mind would even want to go 90 on a KLX".........??????

I took my KLR650 up to 90 once.....that was enough........I backed it down very gently.

It's just stuck in our American brain........SUPER-SIZE IT........!!!!!!!!

[Johnny Monsoon]

Mayby folks are just too caught up with "big cc" bikes.

One says the 250 is a dog.............another calls it amazing !

Maybe....like you said.....at "posted" speeds a 250 would do fine.

Others talk about doing 90 mph on their KLX250...and my thought is ": who in their right mind would even want to go 90 on a KLX".........??????

I took my KLR650 up to 90 once.....that was enough........I backed it down very gently.

It's just stuck in our American brain........SUPER-SIZE IT........!!!!!!!!

You hit the nail on the head here.  The KLX will do higher than posted speeds without issue.  Going fast on this bike 'on' road is not this bike's function.  You can travel at posted speeds all day if you want on this thing, whereas I'd rather endure a symposium on liberal feminism at a live taping of Oprah Winfrey's show with a sign around my neck saying 'Where's my dinner, woman!?!' than to ride the XL for anything over half an hour at highway speed.

Offroad the XL leaves much to be desired against the KLX.  No two ways about it.  The extra heft that doesn't help you on-road at all, now becomes a liability offroad.

I don't think Hondas are a bad bike, and I'll even go so far as to say that the XR is what the XL base should have been, and that the XR shaped the modern offroad-capable DS bikes that followed.  However, the XL comes up short in a lot of ways these days; I desperately wish that they'd get that XR platform reworked into a street-legal bike off the showroom floor (take a cue from KTM?) and get that edge back!

Now, even the bigger thumpers are going to max out near the same speeds (and really shouldn't get much faster than legal speeds for their intended designs).  In that regard, it makes one ask why bother with the larger displacement?  It is more to haul around offroad.  A smaller engine equates to less vibes, and generally better equal range on less fuel.  Both are hugely advantageous for this style/funciton of bike.

Ultimately, it depends on what you're after.   The KLX's great suspension and light weight make it handle ANY trail better than most other bikes in its pricepoint.  The wider saddle and comfortable ergos allow it to connect longish dots between trails nicely.  It will not tolerate a ton of gear strapped to the bike without some subframe upgrades though, and a larger tank would be in order for more epic rides.  Those are things to consider.  Equally worth consideration is the ability to upgrade the engine with factory components for not much money at all, which has a dramatic affect on the bikes power without sacrificing reliability.

All food for thought.

[Albie]

The bike needs to fit the person. It's not the other way around. I wouldn't want to ride ANY dual sport bike (and that's dual sport by my definition) for more then 30 minutes on the hiway, including a KLX 250. My DRZ doesn't spend 1 second more then it has to on pavement. Why would it, I've got 3 street bikes for that. The only reason I have a tagged bike is to ride on public land which many times requires it. If not, I'd be on my KX or even the POS CRF. I don't want a DS bike that works great on pavement. That means I've sacrificed it's dirtability which is much more important to me. For a lot of folks, the KLX is a good fit, and I think it's a pretty good bike. Just not for me. Anymore then that big red pig in the L or R form is either. I don't want under powered or overweight.

In a nutshell, it's about fun factor. Power for a lot of us equates to more fun. Top speed isn't so much what matters although it's fun to go fast. I love the power that comes from a big thumper or even better yet, the explosiveness of a 250 2 stroke.  My DRZ is geared to where it won't do anywhere near 90. 75 is about all it will manage.  Now once the going gets ruff, it eats that shit up! Going fast over the hard stuff works to your advantage, your body actually takes less punishment. That is of course until you eat it.   The suspension is dialed in and the motor is tuned pretty much to perfection. The adrenaline rush of going fast enough to be just on the edge of control is almost as exhilarating as road racing was for me. The MX bikes are even a bigger thrill. Lighter, more HP and even better suspension.    I catch myself laughing and at the same time almost shitting myself when I'm pushing it on the ragged edge. Sometimes I have to pay the piper. Even though I hate the Honda most of the time, when it's running and staying together holy crap is it a beast!   I love just romping on the throttle in 4th gear and nearly looping the monster. It kinda sucks, after I ride the thing I decide that's it, I'm getting rid of the DRZ and getting something with more power and less weight. I imagine it won't be long before I have a plated WR 450 in my garage and I can say goodbye to the Honda and the DRZ. First, I got to get rid of my POS Ford p/u and get me a Tundra before that happens.

[Johnny Monsoon]

The bike needs to fit the person. It's not the other way around. I wouldn't want to ride ANY dual sport bike (and that's dual sport by my definition) for more then 30 minutes on the hiway, including a KLX 250. My DRZ doesn't spend 1 second more then it has to on pavement. Why would it, I've got 3 street bikes for that. The only reason I have a tagged bike is to ride on public land which many times requires it. If not, I'd be on my KX or even the POS CRF. I don't want a DS bike that works great on pavement. That means I've sacrificed it's dirtability which is much more important to me. For a lot of folks, the KLX is a good fit, and I think it's a pretty good bike. Just not for me. Anymore then that big red pig in the L or R form is either. I don't want under powered or overweight.

In a nutshell, it's about fun factor. Power for a lot of us equates to more fun. Top speed isn't so much what matters although it's fun to go fast. I love the power that comes from a big thumper or even better yet, the explosiveness of a 250 2 stroke.  My DRZ is geared to where it won't do anywhere near 90. 75 is about all it will manage.  Now once the going gets ruff, it eats that shit up! Going fast over the hard stuff works to your advantage, your body actually takes less punishment. That is of course until you eat it.   The suspension is dialed in and the motor is tuned pretty much to perfection. The adrenaline rush of going fast enough to be just on the edge of control is almost as exhilarating as road racing was for me. The MX bikes are even a bigger thrill. Lighter, more HP and even better suspension.    I catch myself laughing and at the same time almost shitting myself when I'm pushing it on the ragged edge. Sometimes I have to pay the piper. Even though I hate the Honda most of the time, when it's running and staying together holy crap is it a beast!   I love just romping on the throttle in 4th gear and nearly looping the monster. It kinda sucks, after I ride the thing I decide that's it, I'm getting rid of the DRZ and getting something with more power and less weight. I imagine it won't be long before I have a plated WR 450 in my garage and I can say goodbye to the Honda and the DRZ. First, I got to get rid of my POS Ford p/u and get me a Tundra before that happens.

MUCH, if not ALL of that depends largely on terrain.  My TT-R125 makes nearly zero power, but has decent suspenders.  I can get it through the courses here at my ORV park as fast as any full race-bred bike.  This is just because of terrain; the power is wasted here, and I have a huge advantage of a small, super-lightweight bike.

This brings me back to the little cc vs big cc bike.  If I'm going to ride a bigger cc bike, it had better have gobs more power to make up for the extra weight.  Even a little cc bike with very low power will be much more agile offroad, and thus, way easier to put down any trail fast.  Very fast.

[Albie]

MUCH, if not ALL of that depends largely on terrain.  My TT-R125 makes nearly zero power, but has decent suspenders.  I can get it through the courses here at my ORV park as fast as any full race-bred bike.  This is just because of terrain; the power is wasted here, and I have a huge advantage of a small, super-lightweight bike.

This brings me back to the little cc vs big cc bike.  If I'm going to ride a bigger cc bike, it had better have gobs more power to make up for the extra weight.  Even a little cc bike with very low power will be much more agile offroad, and thus, way easier to put down any trail fast.  Very fast.

You're right, a lighter bike is easier to ride in tight technical stuff, and of course it's more true for a less skilled rider. Obviously the more skilled you are the more you can take advantage of the power. After all, you don't see good endurance, and cross country racers riding little 125's. You seem to be confused there thinking any bike that has more displacement weighs more then your KLX. My DRZ weighs the SAME as your KLX and puts out close to twice as much HP. My CRF weighs 40 lbs LESS then your KLX and puts out more then twice as much as your KLX. Maybe I'm off on my calculation of gobs, but I'd say that covers it.  

[Johnny Monsoon]

You're right, a lighter bike is easier to ride in tight technical stuff, and of course it's more true for a less skilled rider. Obviously the more skilled you are the more you can take advantage of the power. After all, you don't see good endurance, and cross country racers riding little 125's. You seem to be confused there thinking any bike that has more displacement weighs more then your KLX. My DRZ weighs the SAME as your KLX and puts out close to twice as much HP. My CRF weighs 40 lbs LESS then your KLX and puts out more then twice as much as your KLX. Maybe I'm off on my calculation of gobs, but I'd say that covers it.  

A) not my KLX, just one I ride often.  As far as weight goes; if you've ever ridden both you'll know that while they're advertised at the same weight, one of them is lying... a lot.
B) The DRz doesn't even begin to compare to the KLX offroad, or on road.  It only has an advantage over 60mph.  It can get to speed a tad quicker, but that's where it ends.  The KLX is much more of a dirtbike.  I will say that the KLX suffers at highway speed due to steep geometry and for regular highway riding, a KLX should be fitted with a steering damper.
C) Back to terrain; there's no where to open up a bigger bike, you wind up using about as much hp on a bigger bike as you get out of my trail bike.  Were I riding out in a more open are (deserts, etc) instead of tight trails with low underpasses, a bigger bike would be more fun.  

C was my ultimate point.  Know your terrain.  I could easily have spent 3x what I did on the trail bike and not had nearly the fun I have had so far.  If I would have purchased this little trail bike for riding big open spaces and high dunes, well, it would not nearly have been as much fun.

At any rate, I see the tone here changing and I'm not diggin' it.  It seems to have become a 'my bike is better than yours' thread.  If I've given that impression, let me retract it officially.  If anything, I'm trying to point out the attributes that smaller cc bikes have that are often misread or completely propogated as true when they aren't.

[maxrates]

Thanks to all of you for your responses.  I can see your points.

I know everyone is partial to "their" bikes......that's why it is "your" bike.   YOU bought it.

I like the points about big cc NOT being EVERYTHING.  

I like the looks and feel of the KLX250.......just want to hear other who own it and LIKE it.

Thanks

[Albie]

A) not my KLX, just one I ride often.  As far as weight goes; if you've ever ridden both you'll know that while they're advertised at the same weight, one of them is lying... a lot.
B) The DRz doesn't even begin to compare to the KLX offroad, or on road.  It only has an advantage over 60mph.  It can get to speed a tad quicker, but that's where it ends.  The KLX is much more of a dirtbike.  I will say that the KLX suffers at highway speed due to steep geometry and for regular highway riding, a KLX should be fitted with a steering damper.
C) Back to terrain; there's no where to open up a bigger bike, you wind up using about as much hp on a bigger bike as you get out of my trail bike.  Were I riding out in a more open are (deserts, etc) instead of tight trails with low underpasses, a bigger bike would be more fun.  

C was my ultimate point.  Know your terrain.  I could easily have spent 3x what I did on the trail bike and not had nearly the fun I have had so far.  If I would have purchased this little trail bike for riding big open spaces and high dunes, well, it would not nearly have been as much fun.

At any rate, I see the tone here changing and I'm not diggin' it.  It seems to have become a 'my bike is better than yours' thread.  If I've given that impression, let me retract it officially.  If anything, I'm trying to point out the attributes that smaller cc bikes have that are often misread or completely propogated as true when they aren't.

First off on the weight thing. I'm not talking about advertised weight. I KNOW how much my DRZ weighs. It's 272 lbs with a splash of gas, the rad filled and with engine oil and the battery. I will accept the KLX weight at what Kawasaki lists which of course lies about weight just like all the manufacturers do. Well, except for Honda who takes lying to a whole other level. The KLX is listed at 262 lbs dry. Add all the fluids except gas and a battery I seriously doubt the KLX comes in at less the 272.

The KLX is a dirt bike and the DRZ isn't? OK, whatever you say. Silly me, shouldn't have bought a non street legal dirt bike that isn't a dirt bike.  

As for the rest of it, well, you have your opinions, and mine are almost the total opposite. My opinions aren't even based on the MY BIKES BETTER mentality as I'm about to get rid of mine because I want something lighter and with more HP. I actually know there are bikes better then the one I have now for what I want to do.

[garry]

I like the looks and feel of the KLX250.......just want to hear other who own it and LIKE it.

Then go to a forum where owners congregate to ask for opinions such as ThumperTalk.com:

http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=27

There's also a long thread on ADVrider about a guys experience with one.

It appears that most people that bought them to be a street-legal trail bike for tight/slow terrain are happy with them. I also see lots of complaints about it being gutless, probably from people that use it heavily on the street, or ride open terrain, dirt roads, etc. At the end of the day, YOU have to ride one, and make up your own mind about it. Dual-sports are a compromise and you have to decide where you want to compromise: street or trail.

As an aside, I think Johnnie is referring to the street-legal DRZ400S, not the "E", when he says "DRZ". That would be my expectation too since it's the street-legal model (291 lbs dry according to Suzuki). I'd like to weigh my "S" once I'm done with it to see what it really weighs.

[Johnny Monsoon]

As an aside, I think Johnnie is referring to the street-legal DRZ400S, not the "E", when he says "DRZ". That would be my expectation too since it's the street-legal model (291 lbs dry according to Suzuki). I'd like to weigh my "S" once I'm done with it to see what it really weighs.

Exactly so; I wasn't aware (or had missed) that that anyone was referring to a non-street legal bike and comparing it to a street legal one.  I could have as easily recommended the KDX if we were doing that.  However, if you can plate a true dirtbike in your state, that opens up other options.  In NE, there's no way at all to get a dirt bike plated, so even suggesting a DRzE wasn't even a remote consideration.  

[R.Markus]

Thank god, can you all kiss and make up now?

[Albie]

Exactly so; I wasn't aware (or had missed) that that anyone was referring to a non-street legal bike and comparing it to a street legal one.  I could have as easily recommended the KDX if we were doing that.  However, if you can plate a true dirtbike in your state, that opens up other options.  In NE, there's no way at all to get a dirt bike plated, so even suggesting a DRzE wasn't even a remote consideration.  

Uhh, I never once referred to the S model. I referred to MY bike and as you can see in my sig it's an E. maxrates lives in TX, not NE. In TX you can pretty much plate any bike, including a KDX. And I agree, the KDX would be high on my list. I've done ds rides with guys on KDX's. Of course you would have to buy used since Kawasaki doesn't make them anymore. That leads to the new KLX 450R, but it's got it's work cut out going against the proven WR 450. I'd buy the Yammy over the Kawi.

[Johnny Monsoon]

Uhh, I never once referred to the S model. I referred to MY bike and as you can see in my sig it's an E. maxrates lives in TX, not NE. In TX you can pretty much plate any bike, including a KDX. And I agree, the KDX would be high on my list. I've done ds rides with guys on KDX's. Of course you would have to buy used since Kawasaki doesn't make them anymore. That leads to the new KLX 450R, but it's got it's work cut out going against the proven WR 450. I'd buy the Yammy over the Kawi.

Why would you even compare a dediated dirtbike to a DS bike?  That wasn't anywhere in the discussion at all.  I could just as easily have compared it to a GSX-R (after all, we've see folks ride those offroad, RTW)...  Apples to apples.  If you're in a DS thread about street legal bikes, I'd keep the bikes being compared to street-legal from the factory.  I never saw that he wanted a true dirtbike (any of wich would suck profoundly on-road, and all of which would suffer a lot of abuse at highway speeds since the engines aren't built for extended stretches of running at constant rpms).

Clearly, the KLX250S and the XR650L are both street legal bikes.  He didn't ask for data on the KLX450R or the XR650R.  Thus, I gave him data on STREET LEGAL bikes.  I haven't seen once where he said anything about having any interest in converting a dirt bike to a DS bike.  Further, he has made reference to loading up the bike with luggage; something you do not want to do to a dedicated dirtbike as the subframe isn't going to handle that.  I'm not sure how you made the leap to a dirtbike from any of his requirements, but I've always been comparing bikes in the original criteria; which are street-legal DS bikes.

[maxrates]

Clearly, the KLX250S and the XR650L are both street legal bikes.  He didn't ask for data on the KLX450R or the XR650R.  Thus, I gave him data on STREET LEGAL bikes.  

Yep.....That happens on forums.  Someone always throws in a YZ.   But it's OK. It makes me think about all options.  

I considered getting a "dirt bike" licensed here in Texas. It is supposedly pretty easy. But I don't want that. They are just too uncomfortable on the street and I do want to do some short rides (50 miles or so) on the street in decent comfort.

I have owned a KLR650. It , of course, was great on the black-top but not so great in some off road areas.
I guess I want something that is "better" off road than the KLR. So I am looking at the KLX250s, DR650 and the XR650L. There are some used DRs and XRLs for sale in my area.

I have sat on the DRZ and that seat is just not for me.  Maybe just getting old....lol.

Johnny......you really seem to dislike the XRL.  ??????  I sat on a KLX250s again yesterday and the seat does not seem as good as the XRL ???

I may get to test ride an XRL this weekend in Houston........If I do I will post my impressions.

Thanks

[garry]

In the realm of bigger dual-sports from the Big 4, the general consensus is that the XR-L is the best for dirt use, the KLR the best for street use and the DR is in the middle.

The DRZ400S makes about the same power as the XR-L, has more modern suspension and weighs 30+ pounds less than the XR-L, so it should be the better dirt bike just on weight alone. I've done 300+ miles days on a DRZ400S with the stock seat (mostly back roads, some dirt) and lived to talk about it.

Since you talk about paved roads, dirt roads and open trails, I think the bike you really want is the Husky TE-610. Small and lighter works well for uber-tight and gnarly woods, but I don't get the impression that is what your focus is. Six speed tranny. Modern suspension. About the same weight as a DRZ400S. Low maintenance.

Soon (2008? 2009?) I'm sure we are going to see some street-legal, reliable, low/avg maintenance 450 dual-sports from the Big 4 based on the current dirt bikes. The upcoming KLX450R (? right model?) and Yamaha WR450 aren't that from from street-legal. Maybe Honda will remove its head from its ass and make a street-legal XR650R with the magic button.

[Albie]

Yep.....That happens on forums.  Someone always throws in a YZ.   But it's OK. It makes me think about all options.  

I considered getting a "dirt bike" licensed here in Texas. It is supposedly pretty easy. But I don't want that. They are just too uncomfortable on the street and I do want to do some short rides (50 miles or so) on the street in decent comfort.

I have owned a KLR650. It , of course, was great on the black-top but not so great in some off road areas.
I guess I want something that is "better" off road than the KLR. So I am looking at the KLX250s, DR650 and the XR650L. There are some used DRs and XRLs for sale in my area.

I have sat on the DRZ and that seat is just not for me.  Maybe just getting old....lol.

Johnny......you really seem to dislike the XRL.  ??????  I sat on a KLX250s again yesterday and the seat does not seem as good as the XRL ???

I may get to test ride an XRL this weekend in Houston........If I do I will post my impressions.

Thanks

It's very easy to get a bike plated here, just get it inspected, get the green sheet form the guy doing the inspection, get insurance, go to the tax office and get it titled.

The XRL is sporting some serious weight. Not worth the little extra comfort you might think it has over the KLX. Especially if you're only planning short jaunts on the road of 50 miles or less.
DRZ or DR? 2 different bikes.  The DR 650 would still be better then the XRL as well.