I see there's a lot of stuff around about how the Terra fares versus the KLR.
I can see the point as it could be considered as an alternative. However, I think a really useful and valid compariosn would be against the X650 BMWs, Xchallenge, Xcountry....
On paper, there are a lot of simmilarities, but also some significant differences. I think if somebody could make it past the pure specsheet comparison into real facts, this could be priceles for many...
The X BMWs made up for an almost perfect base for Adventure biking, as many riders here have proved. The Terra shows some apparent improvements (larger fuel tank, is currently being produced so you can get a brand new one, already has a steel subframe...) but also some shortcomings;
-Apparently much heavier
-Requires higher Octan
-Higher fuel consumption
Apart from that, yes, suspension can be improved, etc; but all this are things you can easly sort out (may be pricey, but feasible), I instead see no easy way to reduce 22KG
, and wonder for an instance what's the real impact of this weight difference.
It seems clear the bike would be more off-road capable than a KLR, but what about the Xc? And is anybody able to estimate, based on their experience, which one would have the highest limit off-road?
Personally, I've been sine long ago setting up for "the long one" all across Asia, which shall take place once I'm dismissed from my current obbligations (expected Jan '14); I have now a route, some necessary training, languages learned.. and some 15 months ahead of me on which to choose and prepare the final bike -and getting the whole thing "real"-.
Choice for the starting point is between XCountry and Terra. Obviously both would be heavily modified. The Terra has the added benefit of a -small- degree of support from the importer, but rather than that, would appear to be one step back from the Xc....