Torque curve on the 350?
Ok, I don't have any personal reference points into the new KTM's and there aren't any 350's here to demo. So, here is my concern and my query:
There are 5 times as many posts on the 500 EXC/XC-W than on the 350. The dominant comments are that the 500 makes much more torque, and that it is more useable being accessible lower in the rev band, or more broadly across the rev band. [Also, the 500 has a higher top speed - I could care less.] Apparently, the 500 is outselling the 350 by a lot.
So how peaky is the power band, or rather the torque band, on the new KTM 350's? It has to be tons better than the very low torque WR250R, right? [The major complaint about the WR250R's power is that it is way too high in the rev band, and that the peak torque is insufficient.] How does the KTM 350 torque curve compare with a KLX250S with the 351 Kit added? How does it compare to the torque curve of the DRZ-400E? Or even the old DR350SE?
I've never felt the need for a 500cc class enduro, and can identify with past riders of past bikes who said that after a long day, the big torque of a 450/500 is more tiring that a 250/350 class bike. But I'm not hearing that about the new 500. Given the feedback so far, maybe the 500 is the way to go? Just what is the 350 EXC's niche? I'm just afraid that I'll never use all that the 500 has to offer and I hate buying more bike than I need. (In general, I like smaller, lighter bikes.) I'm searching for middle ground, and will buy KTM if I can find it there. The Japanese bikes just seem to have too many compromises.
So, can any imates who have ridden both the 350 and 500, and have good reference points to common Japanese bikes (esp. KLX-351) help me out here?
1990 Honda NT-650 Hawk-GT
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world;
indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead
Gryphon12 screwed with this post 11-13-2012 at 03:06 PM