There are no other electronics besides the ignition and injection.
This absolutely not true of the 3rd generation bikes, which appear to be what the article is talking about. These not only have an electronic dash, they also have a full blown engine computer which is necessitated by both the presence of fuel injection but also emissions control requirements. The bike will not run without that, end of discussion.
That’s not necessarily a likely failure point, mind you. Plenty of vehicles have had ECUs since the 1970s and that specific component at least doesn’t conk out terribly often. But I think the author is conflating the various different historical variations of this bike.
The 1st and 2nd generation models (up to 2018) are indeed mechanical machines and the only electronics in them is the minimal control circuitry for spark timing in the CDI. These are still all discrete components inside anyway, to my knowledge. The CDI is not only a commodity part that’s readily available and replaceable, but it doesn’t contain any chips. There is no fuel injection hardware — both the 1st and 2nd gen have carburetors.
The 1st generation bikes (up to 2007) are so crude they can even be run without a battery installed via their AC rather than DC ignition system. That is, provided you can find a way to bump start the heavy bastard somehow. I recommend having access to a large hill…
Source: I have a 2nd gen KLR650:
I will say this about the KLR’s torque output. While its horsepower may low, I don’t think there is any amount of weight that’s physically possible to put on the bike that its engine cannot lug around. The factory specified load rating of the rear luggage rack is a laughable 22 pounds. I think most KLR adventure riders’ rear luggage weighs more than that when it’s empty, and I’ve successfully loaded probably upwards of 300 pounds on the back of my bike including both a passenger and camping junk and other than the the rear suspension sagging a bunch you’d never even notice.
You see, the thing with the KLR is that it’s already slow. So it is not slowed down noticeably by overloading. It only makes around 35 horsepower at redline, but redline on a KLR is not where you will spend any part of your day unless you’d like to have your ass cheeks oscillated like you were sitting on a paint shaker. Its torque curve is not so much a curve but rather more of a table, with its major torque band starting somewhere around 2000 RPM mark and hitting its maximum shortly thereafter, but then stays there throughout its entire range until the rev limiter finally forces it to tap out.
Getting rolling on an overloaded KLR is thus no trouble whatsoever. You could probably use one to tow a bus.
This absolutely not true of the 3rd generation bikes, which appear to be what the article is talking about. These not only have an electronic dash, they also have a full blown engine computer which is necessitated by both the presence of fuel injection but also emissions control requirements. The bike will not run without that, end of discussion.
That’s not necessarily a likely failure point, mind you. Plenty of vehicles have had ECUs since the 1970s and that specific component at least doesn’t conk out terribly often. But I think the author is conflating the various different historical variations of this bike.
The 1st and 2nd generation models (up to 2018) are indeed mechanical machines and the only electronics in them is the minimal control circuitry for spark timing in the CDI. These are still all discrete components inside anyway, to my knowledge. The CDI is not only a commodity part that’s readily available and replaceable, but it doesn’t contain any chips. There is no fuel injection hardware — both the 1st and 2nd gen have carburetors.
The 1st generation bikes (up to 2007) are so crude they can even be run without a battery installed via their AC rather than DC ignition system. That is, provided you can find a way to bump start the heavy bastard somehow. I recommend having access to a large hill…
Source: I have a 2nd gen KLR650:
I will say this about the KLR’s torque output. While its horsepower may low, I don’t think there is any amount of weight that’s physically possible to put on the bike that its engine cannot lug around. The factory specified load rating of the rear luggage rack is a laughable 22 pounds. I think most KLR adventure riders’ rear luggage weighs more than that when it’s empty, and I’ve successfully loaded probably upwards of 300 pounds on the back of my bike including both a passenger and camping junk and other than the the rear suspension sagging a bunch you’d never even notice.
Also, thank you for the thorough breakdown.
You see, the thing with the KLR is that it’s already slow. So it is not slowed down noticeably by overloading. It only makes around 35 horsepower at redline, but redline on a KLR is not where you will spend any part of your day unless you’d like to have your ass cheeks oscillated like you were sitting on a paint shaker. Its torque curve is not so much a curve but rather more of a table, with its major torque band starting somewhere around 2000 RPM mark and hitting its maximum shortly thereafter, but then stays there throughout its entire range until the rev limiter finally forces it to tap out.
Getting rolling on an overloaded KLR is thus no trouble whatsoever. You could probably use one to tow a bus.
If you don’t already you truly should apply to do moto reviews. I’m fuckin giggling away reading your descriptions, torque curve of a table is a 10
You should consider contacting the author with your correction. Thanks for sharing with us!