Comparison of Dual Sport Bikes

Found this over on AdvRider.

Not to useful. Obviously done by out of touch Euro person, as they've left off several models the Euros have not had for over 10 years and included bikes N. America never got, and mislabeled several as well. Lots of outright errors. I would DELETE that chart and I'm sure the ***** who posted it up on ADV has been chastised for the BS chart.
(EX: WR250F is NOT a dual sport bike, it's a race bike, off road only, KLR is not a 600 ... on and on with the mistakes)

Charts and graphs only go a little way in "comparing" dual sports. These guys are clueless as they got everything mixed up regards engine sizes which matter when judging these bikes. It's experienced riders opinions that matter. And all that matters.

Huge Apples to Oranges differences when putting a 600 lbs. GS next to a 250. Totally different bikes, really in different classes, for different uses.

Perhaps better to break down "dual sport" bikes into 4 or 5 groups? Now we can take each category and break down stats and do ride comparisons within that group.

1. Hard core dirt bike based bikes. All street legal. ALL expensive and maintenance intensive race base bikes: KTM 690, 500EXC, 350, Husky 710, 350, Beta 450 and a few others.

2. Old school standard 650 class dual sports: Most of these been around 20 years or more:
KLR's, XR650L, DR650, XT600 or Tenere' 660. There are a few variations in this group and you could add in the 350 and 400 class bikes too. (DRZ400, some KTM's, Beta, couple others) Also count BMW F650, Sertao.

3. The 250's: CRF250L and Rally, WR250R, DR250, XT250, The Chinese 250's and latest X300 Kawi Versys and soon to come BMW G310GS (which should be a BIG deal)

4. Middle weight street biased bikes: F800 BMW, Tiger 800's, V-Strom 650, CB500X, maybe Ducati Scramblers and a few others.

5. Heavy weight: BMWGS, KTM 1290, Guzzi Stelvio, Aprilia Capo Nord, V-Strom 1000,
Africa Twin 1000, Ducati Multistrada Enduro.

Now, pick a class. Ride all bikes in that class. Now you can talk, or write opinions on your impressions. Bike specs do not make a reviews and many who are looking at bikes ignore most of the data, only checking weight, Horsepower, seat height and range.

The human element is what counts here and why a good reviewer is the key to really getting a feel and honest feedback about a bike.

I did a separate analysis looking at the specific items that were important to me. Items which looked at a number of bikes I was familiar with.



The list narrowed down to three bikes, which I compared more.

Great graphics RSL.

Sure you got the specs right on that K1600?
470 lbs.? Wow! that is light! ... only 90HP?

I love all the bikes you've chosen there save the big BMW.

I owned the FJ-09 very briefly, and thought I would love it ... but hated it. Sold if off within a Week of ownership.

When I went to test ride the Hyper ... I thought sure I'd hate it ...
I loved it. Go figure. I must be going crazy!

The K1600GT numbers are from another bike. I pasted the image to show the vision angle.

I probably had 25 different versions of these comparison graphics.

that vision angle picture confirms what I've suspected about my gripping too hard on the grips earlier this year. The perspective was freaking me out. Seeing *nothing* in front of me was just terrifying to my subconscious mind. After riding bikes with all kinds of parts in view before the road ahead it took getting used to.
Now when I go ride my Suzuki or the V-star I find them annoying because I have so much obscured by the bike. Go figure.