Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Down
Print

Topic: 990 SM-T - what should I know...  (Read 20855 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Windblown
Old Codger in Training
*

Reputation 33
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '04 Concours - '03 FZ1 - '05 KTM 525 - '09 CRF250X - '13 KTM 990 SM-T - '07 Yamaha R6S
GPS: Shenandoah County, VA
Miles Typed: 3540

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« on: May 07, 2013, 07:55:30 pm »

Itching to pull the trigger on something new. I rarely buy new bikes but this time around I am going to. After weeks (months) of pondering different, models from different manufacturers I'm on the brink of pulling the trigger on a 2013 990 SM-T.  

It's almost to similar to my Gen1 FZ1 with it's upgraded suspension and brakes in someways, however it addresses one important aspect that I don't like about the Fizzer, and that's the unrelenting desire for twin cylinder style low RPM torque.  Drool

I'm not a complete stranger to KTMs and their various quirks,  any words of wisdom on this particular bike?  

What will I hate about it. Anything?

Logged

I may die with nothing to show for it but there will be a heck of a garage sale.
Sport-Touring
Advertisement
*


Remove Advertisements

garry
Bleeds Orange...
*

Reputation 95
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09
Motorcycles: KTM 1190 Adventure / KTM 530 EXC
GPS: Southwestern PA
Miles Typed: 6036

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2013, 08:00:45 pm »

Take a long demo ride and let your wood (or lack thereof) be your guide.
Logged

2015 KTM 1190 Adventure
2009 KTM 530 EXC
miles
*

Reputation 85
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: A couple of them.
Miles Typed: 13032

My Photo Gallery


Triangles are my favorite shape




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2013, 08:02:33 pm »

It's going to have less torque at every point in the rev range than your FZ1.  


FZ-1:


Sm-T:
Logged

Three points where two lines meet
Advertisement



Windblown
Old Codger in Training
*

Reputation 33
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '04 Concours - '03 FZ1 - '05 KTM 525 - '09 CRF250X - '13 KTM 990 SM-T - '07 Yamaha R6S
GPS: Shenandoah County, VA
Miles Typed: 3540

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2013, 08:23:30 pm »


It's going to have less torque at every point in the rev range than your FZ1.  


FZ-1:


Sm-T:



Interesting - I'll have to do some research on that.  Not sure how to interpret that dyno you posted. Torque must not have been corrected since it doesn't cross the HP curve where I would expect to see it.
Logged

I may die with nothing to show for it but there will be a heck of a garage sale.
SLK50
Junior Member
*

Reputation 44
Online Online

Motorcycles: '06 FJR
GPS: Altoona, PA
Miles Typed: 1277

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2013, 08:35:50 pm »

Were you expecting something other than 5250 RPMs?  Headscratch

Maybe you could go back and re-read the chapter on HP and torque.
Logged
Windblown
Old Codger in Training
*

Reputation 33
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '04 Concours - '03 FZ1 - '05 KTM 525 - '09 CRF250X - '13 KTM 990 SM-T - '07 Yamaha R6S
GPS: Shenandoah County, VA
Miles Typed: 3540

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2013, 08:39:09 pm »


Were you expecting something other than 5250 RPMs?  Headscratch

Maybe you could go back and re-read the chapter on HP and torque.


Maybe I'm not seeing all the graphs?  Headscratch  I only see one graph and there is no cross over at 5250. Source may be blocked from my work.

Ah... Didn't realize there was a 2nd graph. Still can't see it though.

Only one I see is:

Logged

I may die with nothing to show for it but there will be a heck of a garage sale.
SLK50
Junior Member
*

Reputation 44
Online Online

Motorcycles: '06 FJR
GPS: Altoona, PA
Miles Typed: 1277

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2013, 08:43:51 pm »

Ahhh, my apologies, there is indeed a second graph
specific to the SMT.
Logged
garry
Bleeds Orange...
*

Reputation 95
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09
Motorcycles: KTM 1190 Adventure / KTM 530 EXC
GPS: Southwestern PA
Miles Typed: 6036

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2013, 08:56:33 pm »

Yeah, but what does "sorted" RPM mean? The curves should always cross at 5250, right?

Big twins making big low RPM torque (just because they are twins) is a myth. Torque is a function of displacement and how the engine is tuned. I remember reading liter-class shootouts where the GSXR 1000 and/or ZX-10R made more torque everywhere than the Ducati 999 or Aprilia Mille.
Logged

2015 KTM 1190 Adventure
2009 KTM 530 EXC
Windblown
Old Codger in Training
*

Reputation 33
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '04 Concours - '03 FZ1 - '05 KTM 525 - '09 CRF250X - '13 KTM 990 SM-T - '07 Yamaha R6S
GPS: Shenandoah County, VA
Miles Typed: 3540

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2013, 09:10:03 pm »


Yeah, but what does "sorted" RPM mean? The curves should always cross at 5250, right?

Big twins making big low RPM torque (just because they are twins) is a myth. Torque is a function of displacement and how the engine is tuned. I remember reading liter-class shootouts where the GSXR 1000 and/or ZX-10R made more torque everywhere than the Ducati 999 or Aprilia Mille.


Very true. But not a myth as much as tuning and design parameters. Twins are usually tuned to make torque sooner and sign off quicker than an inline4. A function of design and swinging big ass pistons compared to small ones.

The 990 develops peak torque at a published 7000rpm. That's a fairly low number unless compared to something like a Harley.  In the bit of digging I've done on dyno charts in the last few minutes I'm not sure how there is a chart showing an FZ1 with bigger numbers across the board, but so far I haven't found a back to back test so a comparison is hard to make. However the one constant I've seen so far is that the SM-T beats the FZ1 in HP & torque until well up in the RPMS.  
Logged

I may die with nothing to show for it but there will be a heck of a garage sale.
SLK50
Junior Member
*

Reputation 44
Online Online

Motorcycles: '06 FJR
GPS: Altoona, PA
Miles Typed: 1277

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2013, 09:16:59 pm »



In this particular dyno chart, the scale of HP does not equal the scale of TQ. Compare LHS scale and RHS scale


Irrelevant. HP and torque are calculated
from a formula using 5250 as a constant:
HP = torque x RPM / 5250.
Logged
dxm113
*

Reputation 4
Offline Offline

Miles Typed: 45

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2013, 09:27:35 pm »



Irrelevant. HP and torque are calculated
from a formula using 5250 as a constant:
HP = torque x RPM / 5250.


You are correct. I deleted my post after looking at the graph again.  At first, I quickly glanced at the chart and saw the scales being unequal and assume that's why the plots didn't cross at the expected point.

It is possible to have the plots (lines) not cross at 5252 if the scales are unequal.  However you are correct that the math always works out to HP=TQ at 5252 RPM. 


My guess is either uncorrected numbers or TQ is in units of N-m
Logged
Windblown
Old Codger in Training
*

Reputation 33
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '04 Concours - '03 FZ1 - '05 KTM 525 - '09 CRF250X - '13 KTM 990 SM-T - '07 Yamaha R6S
GPS: Shenandoah County, VA
Miles Typed: 3540

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2013, 09:47:38 pm »



My guess is either uncorrected numbers or TQ is in units of N-m


I think you're correct about the units being in Nm - either that or the particular motor in question was magical cause I've never heard of any FZ1 approaching 100Ft lbs of torque. Wink

Been searching more images. It does look like the Gen1 plays pretty close in torque numbers and  on the extremes of the charts the FZ1 did show better numbers across the board. I hate trying to compare different charts though because it's always apples and oranges. One chart showed a stock Gen1 having 136 hp. LOL.

Perhaps part of the difference in feel is the almost 100lbs less the SM-T is having to move compared to the FZ1.
Logged

I may die with nothing to show for it but there will be a heck of a garage sale.
dxm113
*

Reputation 4
Offline Offline

Miles Typed: 45

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2013, 10:15:19 pm »



I think you're correct about the units being in Nm - either that or the particular motor in question was magical cause I've never heard of any FZ1 approaching 100Ft lbs of torque. Wink

Been searching more images. It does look like the Gen1 plays pretty close in torque numbers and  on the extremes of the charts the FZ1 did show better numbers across the board. I hate trying to compare different charts though because it's always apples and oranges. One chart showed a stock Gen1 having 136 hp. LOL.

Perhaps part of the difference in feel is the almost 100lbs less the SM-T is having to move compared to the FZ1.


My Gen II FZ1 was modded / tuned and dyno'd @ 146HP and 80 ft-lb (by the previous owner).  It is my understanding that those numbers are pretty commons with typical mods (exhaust, air box, PC, tune). I also don't put a lot if credence into the dyno numbers however. My bike runs great and that's good enough for me.

have also never heard of a Gen I or Gen II over 100 ft-lb.

My take is that the SM and FZ are completely different bikes, and will have a completely different feel. I would get a test ride if possible, and let the analysis from your butt dyno and smileage calculation determine the best path!

The SM looks wicked fun.
Logged
Windblown
Old Codger in Training
*

Reputation 33
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '04 Concours - '03 FZ1 - '05 KTM 525 - '09 CRF250X - '13 KTM 990 SM-T - '07 Yamaha R6S
GPS: Shenandoah County, VA
Miles Typed: 3540

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2013, 10:56:08 pm »

I'm hoping for some pretty noticeable differences.

After thinking about it for a bit I think part of the difference in feel (and sound) and percived "torque" is due to having 1/2 the power pulses for a given rpm on a twin as opposed to a 4 cylinder for the same rpm. They don't sound as frantic when on them hard. This makes for a more guttural feel as well as sound. More polished than a thumper yet not the hi-freq vibe typically found on an inline4.

If I was racing I'd want in inline4. For cross county I'd want something big like a C14. But for grin factor that I can still put 300-400 miles a day on I'm thinking the SM-T may be the ticket.  Heck, I did at least a half a dozen 500+ mile days on my DR-Z before the toll on the body overcame the fun of it. I thought about the 690 mill for a bit but decided against it for those times when the day has come to a close and I've got more miles to put on to get home in a hurry. That's when the DR-Z would become totally unbearable. I'd put that joker away after a 500+ mile day and not want to even look at it for a week. LOL.
Logged

I may die with nothing to show for it but there will be a heck of a garage sale.
miles
*

Reputation 85
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: A couple of them.
Miles Typed: 13032

My Photo Gallery


Triangles are my favorite shape




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2013, 09:46:59 am »


I'm hoping for some pretty noticeable differences.

After thinking about it for a bit I think part of the difference in feel (and sound) and percived "torque" is due to having 1/2 the power pulses for a given rpm on a twin as opposed to a 4 cylinder for the same rpm. They don't sound as frantic when on them hard. This makes for a more guttural feel as well as sound. More polished than a thumper yet not the hi-freq vibe typically found on an inline4.




I think that's true.  Everyone believes that twins have more low-end torque, but for a given displacement it generally isn't true.  However, they do give a very different feel, and some people prefer the feel of one type of engine architecture over another.

I've had singles, twins, triples and inline fours and have liked them all when done well and been irritated in turn by those that were done poorly.  I would recommend taking the SM-T for a spin to see if it floats your boat.  If it does, buy it.  There really is no other valid yardstick.
Logged

Three points where two lines meet
Windblown
Old Codger in Training
*

Reputation 33
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '04 Concours - '03 FZ1 - '05 KTM 525 - '09 CRF250X - '13 KTM 990 SM-T - '07 Yamaha R6S
GPS: Shenandoah County, VA
Miles Typed: 3540

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #15 on: May 08, 2013, 10:36:44 am »





I think that's true.  Everyone believes that twins have more low-end torque, but for a given displacement it generally isn't true.  However, they do give a very different feel, and some people prefer the feel of one type of engine architecture over another.

I've had singles, twins, triples and inline fours and have liked them all when done well and been irritated in turn by those that were done poorly.  I would recommend taking the SM-T for a spin to see if it floats your boat.  If it does, buy it.  There really is no other valid yardstick.


So true! Smile

I loved the Triumph 1050 motor, wasn't as thrilled with the rest of the bike (Sprint). I have the Tiger 800XC on the radar still as a possible purchase largely because of my experiance with the 1050 triple.  The only twin I've put miles on was a SV650 which had a nice suspension under it. I thought it had plenty of umph for back road scratching and *almost* enough for the occasional dreaded slab run. Thumpers are great fun but high mileage days on either something like the DR-Z of KTM525 are in the past. 690 Duke was a contender for a minute but decided against it. I've had some decent sized inline4's, a FJR1300 and a C10. Comfy sofas, but the feeling of being "in them" rather than atop of them isn't quite as much fun.  The FZ1 has been a great bike once I put a good suspension under it. Just want something a little different.
Logged

I may die with nothing to show for it but there will be a heck of a garage sale.
expatbrit
*

Reputation 15
Offline Offline

Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: '08 WR250X, '11 Mutleystrada S, ' 12 RC8R
GPS: 'Burque, NM
Miles Typed: 1401

My Photo Gallery


Not all who wander are lost. I probably am, though


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: May 08, 2013, 10:44:46 am »





I think that's true.  Everyone believes that twins have more low-end torque, but for a given displacement it generally isn't true.


cf Panigale, a twin tuned for high-end, and giving up the mid-range torque. I think it's more correct to say MOST twins
are tuned for the low end, but there are similar 4s. (Bandit 1200, 1250 come to mind)

Quote

 However, they do give a very different feel, and some people prefer the feel of one type of engine architecture over another.

I've had singles, twins, triples and inline fours and have liked them all when done well and been irritated in turn by those that were done poorly.  I would recommend taking the SM-T for a spin to see if it floats your boat.  If it does, buy it.  There really is no other valid yardstick.


I do like the 75 degree twin in the KTMs, and the light weight of the SM/SMR/SMT is a huge attraction, more so
than the engine. I had a 950SM that was incredible fun to ride, especially once I had a Renazco seat on it.

Shinobi13 on here has an SM-T that he traded a K1200S for; met him this weekend and the grin factor is
apparently (and, after my 950SM experience, unsurprisingly) wicked huge. 'Enough' power for road use,
wallops out of corners like a rocket, lightweight -- what's not to like?
Logged
expatbrit
*

Reputation 15
Offline Offline

Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: '08 WR250X, '11 Mutleystrada S, ' 12 RC8R
GPS: 'Burque, NM
Miles Typed: 1401

My Photo Gallery


Not all who wander are lost. I probably am, though


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #17 on: May 08, 2013, 10:46:18 am »




So true! Smile

I loved the Triumph 1050 motor, wasn't as thrilled with the rest of the bike (Sprint). I have the Tiger 800XC on the radar still as a possible purchase largely because of my experiance with the 1050 triple.  The only twin I've put miles on was a SV650 which had a nice suspension under it. I thought it had plenty of umph for back road scratching and *almost* enough for the occasional dreaded slab run. Thumpers are great fun but high mileage days on either something like the DR-Z of KTM525 are in the past. 690 Duke was a contender for a minute but decided against it. I've had some decent sized inline4's, a FJR1300 and a C10. Comfy sofas, but the feeling of being "in them" rather than atop of them isn't quite as much fun.  The FZ1 has been a great bike once I put a good suspension under it. Just want something a little different.


Funny; you and I have the exact same opinion on that Sprint. I did ride the Tiger 800, and I'd give it a whirl but I don't think it's going to have the on-road grin factor of the big SM.
Logged
miles
*

Reputation 85
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: A couple of them.
Miles Typed: 13032

My Photo Gallery


Triangles are my favorite shape




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2013, 11:23:14 am »




I do like the 75 degree twin in the KTMs, and the light weight of the SM/SMR/SMT is a huge attraction, more so
than the engine.




I guess we have different ideas of what constitutes light weight.  
Logged

Three points where two lines meet
garry
Bleeds Orange...
*

Reputation 95
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09
Motorcycles: KTM 1190 Adventure / KTM 530 EXC
GPS: Southwestern PA
Miles Typed: 6036

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2013, 11:23:46 am »

I was a bit of a bike whore prior to getting my KTM 950 SMR and have been quite happy with it for 5+ seasons now (54K+ miles). That's saying something. And I don't feel a particular need to buy anything new although I would like a bit more power. The bike isn't fast, but it's fast enough.

That said, I suspect my bike isn't running great and a trip to the dyno to get real numbers might be worth doing. Maybe the jetting needs some tweaking for optimal performance.

As I said at the start of this thread, buy the bike that gives you wood. Test rides > spec sheets.
Logged

2015 KTM 1190 Adventure
2009 KTM 530 EXC
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  



ST.N

Copyright © 2001 - 2013 Sport-Touring.Net.
All rights reserved.

 
SimplePortal 2.3.1 © 2008-2009, SimplePortal