Can KTM build a significantly lighter 700-800cc twin? Is there a market for it?

And once the first weeks' production has full-filled those 160 orders do they move back to making a bike to beat one that 50,000 people wanted last year?

Yes heard it from my dealer recently. Last year he used to ask me if I had heard anything, now he's telling me.

690 Twin!

Has to be a Twin!!

Not a twin. 690 in adv trim. Possibly styled like 1190, not rally...not till 2014.

if you look at the mock-up they showed the dealers its a 690 duke with Adventure body work

Yeah- I read some solid rumors on AdvRider

As an aside, CW recently had an article on a company that rents turnkey 450cc Dakar bikes and full support. They are TM based and have a wet weight of 350 pounds.

It doesn't need to be a twin, it just needs a gearbox which allows for
riding on long pavement sections and slower dirt sections without the
need to change the countershaft sprocket. The 690 engine doesn't vibrate
enough to matter, and if you disagree you are probably better off taking
up a comfortable hobby like golf or bowling. A dual-range gearbox on a KTM
690 would get me to open my wallet in a hurry.

One thing which has not been mentioned yet is the potential of a monocoque
frame structure for saving weight and distributing loads while also increasing
fuel capacity. The future WILL involve composite monocoque structures in
motorcycles because the benefits cannot be ignored.

Another thing that needs to happen is active suspension. Active suspension can
allow a lower ride height and yet also be able to deal with extreme cases which
would normally require a large suspension travel. The best of both worlds ( lower
ride height AND a suspension which can deal with a wide range of obstacles ) is possible
and all it takes is money for the R&D and customers to validate the decision by buying
the products which result.

But the short-term bottom line is that the world economy is in bad shape right now
and that reality doesn't encourage small ( or large ) companies to spend significant
amounts to bring the future into the present. Accordingly, I will ride bikes that actually
exist, rather than wait for bikes which have not been made yet.

The longer term bottom line is that the next leap in motorcycle design won't come from
a company which bases its decisions on a marketing survey, but will come from a company
which takes a courageous leap into the future and in so doing creates a bike which customers
did not even realize they wanted. This requires vision, courage, and financial backing. It won't
come from the Japanese or from BMW, because they are ruled by accountants who make sure that
mediocrity is the end result.

My mate was told by a KTM main dealer that they have been long term testing a 700 twin for two years, up to 250k miles.

What does "TM based" mean ?



.

That's one thing I _really_ like about my ktm 200exc. The 1-3 spacing is CR and the 3-6 spacing is wide ratio. You feel a bit of a gap between 3 but 4-6 is just awesome spacing for going fast and 1-3 is bang on for in the woods.

That's not going to fall in below the 1190 in price point, also I'm not sure about composite frames for an off-road bike. While strong there failure mode is shitty compared to metal.

I'm guessing based on this

http://www.tmmotorcyclesusa.com/

do tell.....

Where is the option for those of us who would say, "The LC8 based, dirt-biased bikes are my unicorn! I have no interest in the 1190 or the mythical, small twin."?

They all have trade-offs, but I think the 9X0 Adventure is one of the most versatile bikes in existence.

Some old pics to mull over.





New Frame Style:

Anybody know the transmission ratios of those Highland engines?? Are they manufacturing all their own engine parts are sourcing from another supplier?

It had less than 1,000 miles when I started the trip, yes it was used.

I had the stock map all the way until Turkey. With the stock map on the highway at 75 mph I was getting 35 mpg. Nick was much higher, but he didn't run the numbers. I just know that we filled up everyday at the same pumps and only once did I take less fuel then his bike. The one time I got better mileage, I was riding faster because my bike handled the slippy dirt road better than nicks F800GS

I'm not sure what he got, I would guess averaging 60 mpg and me averaging 45 mpg.

Agreed, and I don't even need more power. As a side benefit would fuel economy improve just by going to a twin? I don't know anything about this stuff.

And one more thought. I really only care about the motor, transmission and frame. I can't fix or change those things so they have to be perfect from the start. As far as seat comfort, wind protection, lights, fuel capacity/placement and luggage go, WHO CARES? The aftermarket will take care of that for us. We just need the right engine, trans and frame combo to start with.

That's what I'm thinking, I would be perfectly fine with a dirt bike style stripped down version a la 690 Enduro or 950 Super Enduro. Those that do want a fixed fairing could add it easily enough. Same with extra tanks, somebody would come up with front tanks for those that need more range, just like you can buy Aqualines for the 950/990 and the Rally Raid Prod. UK or OEM KTM Rally tanks on the 690-

There is a lot more to it than the "failure mode is shitty". In fact, composites can have better
failure characteristics than many metals because cracks don't tend to propagate in a composite
part like they do in many metals. Many helicopter rotor blades are made of composites. Do you
think they are using those materials because they cannot afford to use metals ? How about the
structure of the largest Airbus ? Did they use composites because they weren't worried about failure ?
Or perhaps you'd like to consider the empennage of the F-18 fighter. Again, composites were used and
they could use any materials they wished. Bulletproof vests are made of composites ... etc.


Composites can be designed to deal with a LOT of abuse. It's common to see a composite mountain
bike frame these days. The "tub" in virtually all Formula 1 cars is composite and is much stronger for
its weight than it could otherwise be if it were made of metals. Drivers routinely survive crashes which
would have been fatal in the days of Mallite ( alloy sandwiched with end-grain balsa ) chassis or "birdcage"
chassis ( a KTM 950 frame is a birdcage structure ). Composites are absolutely the way forward, though as
long as motorcycles continue to sell with the old tech there is no reason for the manufacturers to change what
they offer.


In any case, for bikes to be much lighter than they now are, it's going to take more changes than simply
using pressure casting instead of sand casting. A reduction in engine displacement is not going to magically
drop 50 pounds or more from the weight of a bike. Fundamental changes in how the bike is designed and built
are the things which will make this possible.


Those who don't want to wait and wish and who want a twin can emulate the work done by
Powercell with his 950 Super Enduro.


But I would like to see KTM sell a 690 Enduro with a wide-ratio gearbox and a real-world 250 mile range.
That is the bike which would come closest to being ideal for all-round adventure riding. A twin will get worse
fuel economy than an optimized single because of added reciprocating mass and friction, and will not be
as light as a single, other things ( such as materials and casting methods ) being equal. The 690 is a very
smooth engine considering it is a single, and it has more than enough power. The 690 has other issues which need
to be addressed ( all of which have been discussed on this forum ) but the smoothness and power should not be
deal-breakers for a rider who understands that a single brings benefits which are not possible with a twin.


So, "can" KTM build a significantly lighter 700-800cc twin ? Of course. Will KTM do this ?
I doubt it. They might build a twin which has 750cc displacement, but
they are not going to spend the money required to build a significantly lighter bike
because the bike would not sell in large enough numbers to justify the capital expense
required to tool up to build a significantly lighter bike. Maybe when 1,000 of us line up
and give KTM a full $16,000 deposit KTM might change its mind on whether to embark
on building this lighter bike, but that's not going to happen, so for KTM to actually
build a revolutionary light weight twin someone at KTM is going to have to stick his neck
out pretty far, with the awareness that failure could cost him his career. That's not
what a smart and rational person who is high enough in the KTM hierarchy to have the power
to make such decisions is likely to do, especially not when they are selling all the bikes
they make already.



.

Holy crap that looks awesome. 85hp v-twin, 360lbs!

That will likely be a matter of finding a used Super Enduro or grabbing a current 990 Adventure, while they last, and modding. Seems everything, nowadays, needs to fit in a "catagory" and with the Adventure Touring bikes all migrating to 1,200cc, and the big singles hovering between 500 - 690cc, that leaves the 700 - 800cc middleweight multicylinder class.

That isn't all bad. There is a lot of ways to implement an 800cc bike. Light, high hp race motor, offroad focused or more adventure focused with lower hp, efficiency and reliability in mind. I'm happy that the 1190 rides dirty as good as that preliminary report. That might just have some of the 990 fans changing their opinion once they get a ride on one. Will be fun to hear how it compares in the inevitable new shootouts. I hope the first one is against the 990 Adventure.

Even in this thread there seem to be two camps for this midsize unicorn. Those focused on more relaxed and relliable and those wanting a more aggressive bike or even a 690-based bike. We'll not all get our wish (and maybe none of us) but it sure is fun to talk about it!