Thinking about a dual sport/adventure Motorcycle

Ted said:
For me the engine was really what I found underwhelming in what was supposed to be a sport bike. Of course, that was in the first part of my 20s, when any bike under 100 HP was lame. :)
Click to expand...

To each their own! I find the power of my Firebolt quite enough - it's torquey and pulls pretty hard whenever I crack the throttle. Not modern superbike fast, or course, but "perfect for me".

A couple qualifiers:

1) I installed Buell's "Race Kit" on my bike, consisting of a less restrictive muffler, a K&N type air filter and the ECM to take advantage of said parts. Stock, the bike has 92 hp, which more than the Ducati 900SS I had (79 hp) which itself never felt slow. Not sure how much the Race Kit adds - but it certainly is LOUDER!

2) When the XB9 series came out, there was disappointment it was so "small" at 984cc. It was bemoaned that they didn't use the full 1200cc Sportster motor. But then, when the XB12 series came out, a lot of riders ended up preferring the smaller engine XB9 - it seemed to rev more freely and feel more like a sport bike than its bigger brothers.

Not trying to convince anyone, but the whole XB9R package just pleases me no end. No accounting for taste, I suppose!
 
Most people considering a DS end up with a Kawasaki KLR650. Sure, it’s quite a compromise but that’s what a DS is. It’s heavy for off-road but comfortable on the highway. People have trusted the KLR to take them around the world. Simple to fix and bulletproof once you do a couple of standard mods that are common knowledge. The 2022 model (which is now available) is fuel injected.
 
FastEddieB said:
To each their own! I find the power of my Firebolt quite enough - it's torquey and pulls pretty hard whenever I crack the throttle. Not modern superbike fast, or course, but "perfect for me"!
Click to expand...
Glad it floats your boat. I really liked the 954, but I could no longer deal with the crouched riding posture. My brother seems to like it just fine, I just watched him ride his GSXR 750 to and from Michigan with no ill effects. Lucky bastard, I wish I could do that. I had to give up the 954, now I ride its little brother, a CB1000r. A little tame for my blood, but the riding posture is massively improved. I can ride all day on it and not be in pain at the end of it. Couldn't do that on the race bike for more than a few minutes. There are better naked sports out there, but I like the Italian styling on mine, so it stays.

Fun anecdote for this thread. I have an old old set of Nelson Rigg saddlebags. The plastic that allows the bag to keep its shape turned brittle with age, and the bags sag horribly on the bike and look awful. I called up Nelson Rigg, and their sending me new plastic. They don't even make these bags anymore, but their sending plastic from another. Give them props for supporting their product.
 
FastEddieB said:
To each their own! I find the power of my Firebolt quite enough - it's torquey and pulls pretty hard whenever I crack the throttle. Not modern superbike fast, or course, but "perfect for me".

A couple qualifiers:

1) I installed Buell's "Race Kit" on my bike, consisting of a less restrictive muffler, a K&N type air filter and the ECM to take advantage of said parts. Stock, the bike has 92 hp, which more than the Ducati 900SS I had (79 hp) which itself never felt slow. Not sure how much the Race Kit adds - but it certainly is LOUDER!

2) When the XB9 series came out, there was disappointment it was so "small" at 984cc. It was bemoaned that they didn't use the full 1200cc Sportster motor. But then, when the XB12 series came out, a lot of riders ended up preferring the smaller engine XB9 - it seemed to rev more freely and feel more like a sport bike than its bigger brothers.

Not trying to convince anyone, but the whole XB9R package just pleases me no end. No accounting for taste, I suppose!
Click to expand...

I think everything you've said makes sense. The one that I rode probably only had 10 miles on it, was brand new off the showroom. It was the 1200cc Sportster motor.

I have no idea how much power it had, but it definitely wasn't anything close to 90-something. A quick Google says that in the mid 2000s the Sportster 1200 made around 65 HP, and that sounds about right for what this bike did. Maybe it was 75. Again, I was riding an RC51 at the time which was close to double that number, and in my early 20s I definitely had a much stronger desire for high horsepower bikes. Now, it's certainly more about experience. My Guzzi at ~50 HP is slow for a motorcycle, but it's satisfying to ride. The straight pipes went a long way for that. :)
 
Today I went for a ride for fun, and headed by the Harley dealer to see about trying out a better windshield for my Ultra Classic. Turns out they don’t carry anything for my old 2009 anymore in stock, so I failed there. But then I saw this and asked to test ride it:

A9A28F25-B038-4F09-9C74-776479F5BE03.jpeg

No

It’s a Benelli TKX502X, adventure bike. 500cc parallel twin 2-cylinder, $9k MSRP with the bags on it (which seemed quite nice). Basically supposed to compete with an F650GS I think. They let me take it for a quick test ride.

Riding it wasn’t bad, but not great. It’s very buzzy and I got a lot of vibrations through my feet (although not my hands). The transmission, suspension, and brakes all seemed decent. But at over 500 lbs with that 500cc engine, it lacked enough power for decent get up, while also feeling too heavy to justify such a small engine, at least to me. Of course I realize for adventure riding less power isn’t a bad thing, and that’s probably part of what they were thinking. The power delivery was definitely smooth and it seemed like it could be very controllable off road. At my height (6’), I still couldn’t flat foot it, so you do need to be a pretty tall rider.

So I didn’t buy it, but it was cool to ride. I’ll be curious to see what I think of the various BMWs I’ll be riding over the next few weeks.
 
steingar said:
Benelli is just rebranded Chinese frak, if I’m remembering correctly. I’d not touch it.
Click to expand...

I’d never even heard of the brand before, but if I had to guess the origins by how it rode, Chinese would make sense. In fact that was part of what I was wondering riding it.

It’s got some nice looks, I’ll give it that, it just misses the mark everywhere else. I definitely won’t be buying one.
 
So... what do you want to do with the dual sport? Ride trails? Gravel roads? Because no bike does it all. Bigger bikes like the BMW GS are pigs off road on rear trails. They do fine on pavement and gravel roads. KLR650s aren't trail bikes either, but they can be made to do it. They're heavy, low powered, and have crap suspension compared to a trail bike. It you want to just plonk around on dirt roads and explore the occasional trail, they're fine.

I had a KTM 950Adv for a number of years. Loved it. Never had issues with it. Took it on multiple multi-day trail rides w/camping in Canada. Did rally rides on it. Took it in the local dirt bike areas. Great on the highways, can do 100 down a dirt road with 12+" of suspension travel. Silly 100hp dirt bike.
I've love a KTM 690 if I still rode. Great do it all bike.
Another good dual sport is the Suzuki DR650. More motor, better suspension that the KLR.
If you want a trail bike, Honda/Suzuki/KTM/Yamaha make great 450cc dirt bikes. Depending on your state, you can easily add lights if they don't come with them and plate the bike.
 
And a Benelli dual sport? Lol no. That's just an upright positioned streetbike with expensive parts.
The harley DS bike I wouldn't take on more that a dirt road, either.
 
Something to keep in mind - the BMW GS 650 twins are 800cc engines. Comparing them to the GS650 single or other ~650s won't be very fair.
 
UngaWunga said:
I had a KTM 950Adv for a number of years...can do 100 down a dirt road with 12+" of suspension travel.
Click to expand...

I had a 2005 and its ability to smooth out bumps on rough dirt roads was almost magical. Must have been its WP (was White Power?!?) suspension. Coincidentally, I also took mine on a Canadian adventure!

8138266212_5a2dab20c1_z.jpg
 
Ah yes, Canada... where I learned that you should walk the water crossings first to see how deep they are before riding through them...

i-bDWQqw7-XL.jpg


i-MhQ4TpZ-XL.jpg
i-cXZbzzr-XL.jpg
i-NwpfT2z-XL.jpg
 
@UngaWunga at this point, my interest for an adventure bike is just exploring gravel/dirt roads. I don't see myself doing harder motorcycle trails at this point. Will I in the future? Maybe. But that's not the point right now.

Once I start riding my friend's borrowed R1150GS on some of these roads, that'll give me a better idea of what I really want to do I think. I like taking off on the motorcycle for an hour or three and just exploring the roads around here, going whichever way they take me. With the motorcycles I have, I turn around at dirt/gravel. Something for which I didn't feel like I had to do that with sounds appealing.

I do like the idea of doing more off-roading, but we have the Land Rover for that and at this point we've done very little off-roading with it. I'd like to do more, but it just hasn't happened. Maybe that'll change. But for now, figure the goal is something that can handle dirt/gravel roads, but still needs to be good enough to use on-road since many/most of our roads around here are 55 MPH anyway.
 
Yup. But your harleys would be fine on dirt roads as well. Don't need a specialized motorcycle for that.
 
Buy a used KLR. It will give you an idea of what you really want, and you can turn it for probably what you paid after some of the learning curve is over. The DR, XR will all do the same for you. Get one, learn what you want to do, then you will know waht you really want, without a big financial risk. One thing to remember, weight is bad off road, but usually fairly good on road.
 
UngaWunga said:
Yup. But your harleys would be fine on dirt roads as well. Don't need a specialized motorcycle for that.
Click to expand...

From what your said, it sounds like you’re likely a better and more experienced rider than me, at least off road. I’m comfortable with my Harleys, but as heavy as they are I’m definitely not comfortable riding them off road. The Guzzi, might be better/fine, but given my off road motorcycle experience (assume it to be about zero) and how pretty that bike is (not to mention the fact that I want to keep it that way), I wouldn’t really want to.
 
Today my friend and I went riding on his BMWs:

CD683146-17B7-4157-83B8-95ED38F36A21.jpeg

First I rode the R1200GS, and then the G310GS. I liked both of them a great deal, more than I honestly thought I would.

The riding wasn’t necessarily traditional adventure bike territory, but we ended up riding from Brooklyn up to Sleepy Hollow NY where we then swapped bikes and rode back. For those unfamiliar, New York roads are filled with potholes, and are generally in poor quality. To that end, they end up being good for testing the suspensions over rough-ish terrain in the urban jungle. We also got some highway where we could get some faster speeds checked.

At my friend’s suggestion, I rode the R1200GS first. It’s a 2017 (I think, something around then) and has a great amount of technology in it. While it’s no secret that I’m more than a bit of a Luddite and normally prefer as few technological aids as possible, in this case I found them mostly helpful and things I liked. Unlike Kansas, we had lots of stop and go traffic , and loud it shifting, etc. Plus sitting on Gilles at stop lights/signs. Little features that normally annoy me like the hill start assist and the auto shift clutch (tap the shifter up or down while moving) I found to be rather nice to have to give my hands a break. The big bright screen didn’t have much lag in it so, while I tend to prefer analog gauges, this was nice.

I played around with some of the active modes that controlled the suspension, brakes, and engine. I see the benefit of it for some people, although for me that was less of an issue on this drive and I could’ve done without that and the extra buttons.

Suspension over the bumps and potholes was excellent. I was aiming for some pretty bait holes to see how it did, and it was still quite comfortable. Yet at speed it wasn’t soft or floaty. In fact, it was very confident at highway speed and the windshield didn’t produce any buffeting of my helmet and also blocked enough air that it was clear it could be a comfortable iron butt bike.

What impressed me the most was how lightweight the motorcycle felt to me. Despite being over 500 lbs and heavier than that cheap Benelli I rode last weekend, it felt much lighter weight. If I’d have guessed how much it weighed with my eyes closed and just on picking it up off the stand, I would’ve guessed closer to 425-450. Really a nice bike all around.

I then rode the G310GS. The bike costs maybe 1/5 what the big R1200GS costs, basically no features besides ABS, and something around 35 HP. With a small single cylinder it needed to rev high to make that power, but it was geared well and although it was obviously slower than the big one, it still felt fun and adequately powered below 60-65. At faster highway speeds, it definitely felt wound up and out of its element. The suspension on the highway would tend to wobble a bit if I gave it a bit of a step function input on the bats, but not awfully so. And similarly when hitting bad bumps you could tell it didn’t handle them quite as well as the bigger GS, but it was still comfortable and confident enough with them. My friends then drove me to the airport to catch my flight in their Mini, and I noted how much firmer the suspension was on the Mini than either bike.

Really, I liked both of them a lot, and it makes me excited to see how I like the R1150GS I’ll be riding in the next couple weeks. Being older and more agricultural, I suspect I’ll like it a bit more, but I also bet it won’t be as confident in the highway and feel heavier than that 1200GS.
 
Ted said:
From what your said, it sounds like you’re likely a better and more experienced rider than me, at least off road. I’m comfortable with my Harleys, but as heavy as they are I’m definitely not comfortable riding them off road. The Guzzi, might be better/fine, but given my off road motorcycle experience (assume it to be about zero) and how pretty that bike is (not to mention the fact that I want to keep it that way), I wouldn’t really want to.
Click to expand...

They have a long wheelbase and carry their weight low. Even with street tires, they're perfectly fine on dirt roads. Anything you can drive a Honda Civic on, you can easily ride a harley on. But I think we're finding the difference between need and want... :lol:
 
If you’re going to get a Dualsport get something light for riding off-road. If you’re going to spend more time on the road I think you’ve already got that covered with what you have in your garage. Though some will disagree, a 600# bike is not for places a real Dualsport is meant to go. A $25,000, 600# Adventure bike is for the guy who wants to travel big distances while poking his nose down a dirt road now and then. To see a nice selection of “Adventure “ bikes, visit your local Starbucks and talk with the riders of those machines.
 
Brad Smith said:
If you’re going to get a Dualsport get something light for riding off-road. If you’re going to spend more time on the road I think you’ve already got that covered with what you have in your garage. Though some will disagree, a 600# bike is not for places a real Dualsport is meant to go. A $25,000, 600# Adventure bike is for the guy who wants to travel big distances while poking his nose down a dirt road now and then. To see a nice selection of “Adventure “ bikes, visit your local Starbucks and talk with the riders of those machines.
Click to expand...
…,can I get an Amen?!
If you cannot lift it when down, you shouldn’t be riding it off road. I’ve done the R1150gs/KLR650/R100GS things and I’m still looking for a T-dub. There is a reason that they’re hard to come by.
 
Ted, yes, ride the "free" 1150GS for a while, but do know that it's three generations older than the 1200GS you just rode. The engine and transmission will be much more agricultural, and it's down about 35hp from the water boxer. Similarly, the chassis and suspension is three gen older, and BMW OEM shocks of that era were total garbage. By 20kmi they're pogo sticks that are ready for the dumpser, and even before they wear out, they're far from good. If the 1150's owner has replaced the shocks with quality aftermarket you're golden, but if not, blah. The rear shock only has rebound adjustment, but it affects the compression as well. If you dial in enough rebound to get rid of low speed (as in low suspension speed, not vehicle speed) wallowing, the compression is harsh enough to kick your ass like a mule over high speed road imperfections. Dial it back out to get an acceptable ride, and the wallow is back. No win. I solved it on my 1150RT by chucking the stockers and installing a set of custom made Wilbers. What will not be lacking is the brakes, even the 1150 gen brakes were very strong.
 
@Bill thanks for the detailed differences. The agricultural engine/transmission and less horsepower I don't think will matter to me at all. I tend to like things that feel more mechanical. The suspension is very interesting, and what you say isn't entirely surprising. With this being a borrowed bike I'm not going to do anything to it (other than maybe some minor things to give it back in better condition than my friend left it with me in, certainly not replacing shocks). From what I understand, his dad rode it pretty hard so my expectation is that it's fairly worn. Given what you say, the suspension will probably not be great on it anymore.

On the R1200GS, the suspension was definitely what I was most impressed by, and so I probably won't like this one as much. Of course, the NYC roads (i.e. complete junk) I think made it really shine.

Part of what I've been excited about is getting to ride these three different BMWs so close together is seeing the differences, of course two newer/low mile bikes vs. one older, well-used bike isn't a fair comparison.
 
My friend dropped off his R1150GS yesterday for me to borrow and play around with. His father had given it to him and he's not much of a rider, so he hasn't ridden it pretty much at all. However my friend's father rode it all over the world - literally - and it has 94k miles on the clock. 94k hard miles, and supposedly on its second engine. But it's been maintained overall. Ohlins rear suspension (and I think front, it has something for a front suspension) for one. Everything does work on it. Today I took it for a ride to get some initial impressions.

There are some things with the bike that I think are mileage related. It feels like there's resistance in the throttle cable that shouldn't e there. The throttle butterflies individually feel fine. I sprayed some WD40 and that seems to have helped it some. Also I think the exhaust has a couple of leaks in it, but is otherwise extremely quiet (too quiet for my liking - as a surprise to nobody). Also, the engine feels held back somehow. Not that it's running poorly or bucking, just that it feels like it should be making more power. I don't know if there's a restriction somewhere or that's just how it feels. I forget the year, but it is a twin-spark air head, so it has two spark plugs per cylinder. I may change the plugs on it.

The bike feels a lot heavier than the R1200GSA I rode a few weeks back. Of course it is, but it feels even heavier still. That R1200 felt extremely light, this feels more appropriate for its weight. It's not too heavy or unwieldy (especially compared to my Harley), but you can still tell how much it weighs.

What's funny with it is that it doesn't seem happy on pavement. It tracks straight, does fine at highway speeds, all of that. But it just doesn't seem as happy or naturally comfortable there, unlike the R1200GSA which felt just fine on pavement. I took the 1150 on some of the paved/gravel roads, and it really felt happy there. It was almost like the bike started to seem like it was happier once it saw the "Pavement Ends" signs. So I think that it does need some minor improvements to make it run better, and it's not a bike that I think I would buy per se. But I do think it'll do fine for what I was looking for, of exploring the non-paved roads around my area.
 
Ted, I'd have to ride it to compare with the oilhead RT I owned, but in general the oilhead is not an inspired engine. It's down 35 hp on the 1200 you rode, and probably down near that in torque as well. And, IIRC, the hp peak is at 7200rpm or so, so it's not a revver. That engine has more in common with a tractor than it does a sportbike lol! The throttle cable or the individual cables from the bowden box to the carbs may be the source of the heavy throttle. I know I replaced the throttle cable several times during my ownership.

Those 70/30 tires won't be as happy on the roads as a 90/10 tire, what did the 1200 have on it?

As for feeling heavy, well, compared to the 1200 it is heavy. Starting with the hex head, BMW put that chassis on a bigtime diet, concentrated on mass centralization, and designed livelier chassis geometry. Remember, the 1150 is three generations back from the 1200 you rode recently. I'd call it a solid workhorse of a bike, but nothing anyone is going to write a love song about lol.
 
All good points Bill, and things I was thinking about. Like you said, that air head has much less horsepower, much less torque than the 1200. I do get your "agricultural" reference. It does have some of that tractor feel to it, and I'm sure the tires are part of it (the 1200 I think had 90/10 tires, but the G310GS had similar looking tires to this 1150GS and rode fine on road). To your weight point, yes, it absolutely is a heavier bike - my point is more that it feels like the weight it is (not a bad thing) whereas the R1200GS feels like a much lighter bike. Again, not surprising.

Oh, can't remember if I mentioned, but I did intentionally test out the ABS and it works well. Tried it on the gravel roads (at low speeds, controlled) to see if it did what it was supposed to. It did, made it easy to keep control.

I need to look at the cables some more and try to get some more lubrication in to see if they'll improve more. This thing looks to still have the stock exhaust on it, including a big catalytic converter, and I suspect that holds back the engine some. I definitely don't expect it to be the sort of rocket, but it feels more like my Harley did before I did the engine upgrade. That was a heavier bike with (on paper) less horsepower. Maybe it has to do with my expectations at certain RPMs, and the fact that I'm having to physically work the throttle harder to get power may be playing tricks on me some. But the spark plugs look very old, and it's been sitting for the past 5 years or so, so I think it's worth at least changing those and running some injector cleaner through to see if that helps things. I may be mentally comparing it more to that 1200 which, as you said, is a much newer bike, better in all respects. Its acceleration is maybe more in line with the Guzzi, which I suppose is about right, but it feels almost as if the ignition timing is retarded some (which maybe it is, I think that has some level of adjustment on these bikes?).

Bill, you might know. At low throttle (like just off idle before getting going) it sounds like there's something that's knocking around in the air box. Are there flaps or something in there that could be loose, or is that some artifact of the boxer engine? I do notice the injectors on this are very noisy - maybe somewhat clogged due to age and sitting (again, injector cleaner may help). Also do you have any suggestions on plug types for the twin spark air head engines? It seems there's much debate on the internet - I was just going to go with the plugs recommended by the factory. And do an oil change.

The transmission shifts well - overall smoothly. It seemed to miss a few shifts at first but that could just be me getting used to the transmission, or it getting some oil back through it after sitting for a while. I am impressed with the brakes - it stops very well.

Really, I'd like to get the engine running a bit better, but I think it's otherwise just fine for what I want to use it for. Not what I would buy, but as long as my friend doesn't mind me keeping it out of his garage and using it, then it should do. It was really fun and refreshing to go explore some of the dirt roads. There's interesting things to see on them. While some folks in this thread pointed out I could ride my Harleys on them and that might not be wrong, for me, I'd prefer something that feels more at home there. I'm not the same level of motorcycle rider as I am car/truck driver or pilot.
 
Doing a bit more reading, it seems the factory tuning for the R1150GS is very lean. I still think it's probably making less power than it could, and probably also part of my perception of how it's running. As you said, @Bill , it's not an inspired engine out the door.
 
I've been riding my friend's R1150GS that's sitting in my shop from time to time. To be honest, I haven't particularly liked riding it, even though I do like looking at it. I like it more off road than on, and at 94k miles it is definitely worn. My friend's dad also maintained it, but not to "Ted level" maintenance. I'd more or less written off that the personality was just what it was - the somewhat uninspired 1150 air head engine, and some tuning on the motorcycle that was more oriented towards off-road and less response, where it seems to do better.

But I am now thinking I'm going to do a bit more maintenance on it to see if I can make it happier. I've now ridden 6 BMW motorcycles (4 boxers and 2 single cylinders) ranging from the 1950s to about 2017, about a 65 year spread. Out of them, this is the only one that I really just don't like the personality of. Knowing that the engines tend to be calibrated lean and are also sensitive to the valve lash setting, I'm going to do a little bit of work to see if I can get it happier and get me liking it more. I'll start of with the valve lash (and do an oil change while I'm at it, which it needs anyway) and inspect the plugs to see what's in there and what they look like. There are also a couple of easy hacks I found to richen up the fuel some from the factory/EPA lean settings, which should make the engine happier too. Since I like playing with engines and these are some minor things, I think it's worth doing and should be fun to see the results and if that improves what I think of the bike. And if it doesn't, well, it's still sitting here and I can use it when I feel like it.
 
I got a DRZ400 about a year ago and love it. I've done pretty technical stuff with it and can run 65-70 no problem. Great bike if your aren't doing much highway, and it is a hoot on the street as well.
 
I would echo the KLR 650's Suzuki cousin, the DR650. I had a 1991 that would easily keep up with interstate traffic yet was (barely) light enough to ride down some pretty rough trails in the Blue Ridge Mountains. Selling it is one of my most often thought about regrets.
 
Back when I was riding small displacement street bikes I rode them on everything. Street tires, but I rode them on dirt, sand, gravel, you name it. I went where I wanted to go. When I was last in Guatemala I rode a little 150cc Yamaha everywhere, dirt, cobblestones, and, it just didn't matter. It was fun. If you aren't doing technical stuff street bikes work just fine. I think I'd be somewhat more hesitant to take Il Negrini on any off those surfaces. the bike is fairly high-toned and I suspect the back wheel would start spinning and sliding pretty quickly. but its' 500cc little brothers I'd take on surfaces like that without thinking twice. Most days its the rider, and not the bike.
 
Poked around a bit at the R1150GS, including getting it set up for adjusting the valve lash tomorrow. Noticed a few things.

The engine was replaced in this bike. It should be a single spark plug engine, but it's a dual spark plug engine. The secondary spark plugs connect to nothing and are just there to fill holes in the cylinder head. Not necessarily a problem, but I took it as a sign to take a look at what else there was on the bike. I knew it had the catalytic converter removed, and these bikes run lean to begin with and that can make them run leaner. The spark plugs do look like they run lean, and they're an Autolite plug which on the forums is known for helping the lean surge problem these engines tend to have with the single spark. The plugs look lean and slightly oil fowled, although not unexpectedly so for an air cooled boxer. But the lean part is what's noticeable.

I pulled one of the valve covers off and got the engine at TDC on the compression stroke to get set up for the valve adjustment on that side. The valves are definitely too tight vs. spec (0.15 mm intake and 0.30 mm exhaust, or approximately 0.006" and 0.012" in American), and no idea if they're matched between the two intake and two exhaust valves. The rocker arrangement is extremely unusual, not like anything I've seen before:

242229276_184087480476676_2660589359740734810_n.jpg


It's a pretty neat way to allow 2 valves per cylinder from the lower mounted camshaft. But I can also see how, with it setup the way that it is, it would be sensitive to each valve adjustment influencing the other, hence why you're supposed to adjust all 4 at the same time.

And there are a couple of minor exhaust leaks in the system.

I think I'm getting a picture together of some of what's gone on with this bike and why the engine is unsatisfying/uninspiring.

The engine runs lean normally, and runs leaner with the cat removed. The Autolite plugs (which I have found are generally inferior as far as performance goes, but apparently ignite these lean mixtures better) were put in to solve the surging issue and make the bike run better leaner.

The valves are off, which also mess up airflow and general engine performance. And some exhaust leaks don't help matters any.

So my thought is, adjust the valves, probably adjust the throttle butterflies to make sure they're sync'd, seal up the exhaust leaks. See if I can hack some extra fuel in to make it richer, and probably put in the specified NGK plugs to replace the Autolites.

I'll bet that those details will help. I may still not like it, but those things do have a tendency to matter.
 
Lots of practical advice here. But it's all wrong.

You should get a Ural. Expensive, heavy, probably not all that reliable, completely impractical.

DSC_0127.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted
Ted,

There are some good vids on youtube on how to properly do an oilhead valve adjust. To do it best, you need four feeler gauges, and you put them all in at the same time and try to adjust that they all have the same amount of drag. It's a finicky process, but goes quickly once you learn the drill and results in a better running engine. Let me search a bit...

EDIT: You cannot use just one feeler, as putting the feeler under one side of the rocker changes the gap on the other valve on that rocker. It is indeed a unique setup.

EDIT 2: Well clean the reusable valve cover gasket and the mating surfaces. You want them to be dry and oil free when you re-assemble. Any residual oil and it will slowly seep oil all over your riding boots. DAMHIK.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top